1 Serial No. 06 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 191 of 2026 Date of Decision: 20.08.2026 Shri. Rangdondor Lyngdoh, aged about 29 years old, S/o Shri. Piarly Mawthoh, R/o Umkynsier Village, Jirang Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya Presently serving sentence at District Prison & Correctional Home, Ri-Bhoi District. …….. Appellant - Vs - State of Meghalaya Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Government of Meghalaya. ……… Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv. Mr. B. Komi, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Kharmih, Addl. PP. Mr. S.A. Sheikh, Assistant PP. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the applicant, who has 2026:MLHC:913 2 submitted that the applicant has filed an appeal before this Court, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment dated 14.05.2026 and related order of sentence dated 15.05.2026 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Ri-Bhoi District, Nongpoh in Special (POCSO) Case No. 5 of 2019, whereby, he was convicted and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3(three) years with fine of ₹ 5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only, and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment of 1(one) month for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. The applicant is also convicted to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6(six) months with fine of ₹ 1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment of 15(fifteen) days for an offence punishable under Section 448 IPC. 2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 35 days has occurred, on the ground that after the said judgment was pronounced, the applicant was lodged in judicial custody, and had no immediate access to legal assistance or financial resources to file an appeal or to engage a counsel. In view of the circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant, he could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, thereby causing such delay. It is therefore prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted. 3. Mr. H. Kharmih, learned Addl. PP appearing for the State respondent 2026:MLHC:913 3 has no objection to the prayer for condonation of the delay. 4. On consideration of the submission made, this Court is inclined to allow this application on being satisfied that the grounds cited for the delay contain sufficient cause. Accordingly, the delay of 35 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned. 5. Registry is directed to diarize the appeal and list it for admission after 1(one) week. 6. Misc. Case disposed of. Judge 2026:MLHC:913 Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2026.08.20 16:20:12 IST