Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010071152026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/382/2026 DHARMENDRA TALUKDAR SON OF LT. HEMCHARAN TALUKDAR, RESIDENT OF VILL KORDOIGURI, P.S. PATACHARKUCHI, DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM -781326. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. 2:RATNESHWAR ROY SON OF LATE TEMBAL ROY RESIDENT OF VILL SIALMARI PATACHARKUCHI P.S. AND DISTRICT BAJALI PREVIOUSLY BARPETA ASSAM - 781326 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A ATREYA, MR. J KONWAR,MS. C KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS T PARASHAR (AMICUS CURIAE,R2) Linked Case : EC/0/0 DHARMENDRA TALUKDAR SON OF LT. HEMCHARAN TALUKDAR RESIDENT OF VILL KORDOIGURI P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM - 781326. Page No.# 2/3 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM. 2:RATNESHWAR ROY SON OF LATE TEMBAI ROY RESIDENT OF VILL SIALMARI PATACHARKUCHI P.S DISTRICT BAJALI PREVIOUSLY BARPETA ASSAM - 781326. ------------ Advocate for : ANUBHAB ATREYA Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : ST.Rev./0/0 DHARMENDRA TALUKDAR SON OF LT. HEMCHARAN TALUKDAR RESIDENT OF VILL KORDOIGURI P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM - 781326 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM 2:RATNESHWAR ROY SON OF LATE TEMBAI ROY RESIDENT OF VILL SIALMARI PATACHARKUCHI P.S DISTRICT BAJALI PREVIOUSLY BARPETA ASSAM - 781326 ------------ Advocate for : ANUBHAB ATREYA Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 17.07.2026 Heard Mr. J. Konwar, learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. P.P., representing the State respondent as well as Ms. T. Parasar, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent no. 2. This is an application, filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay of 137 days in preferring the connected appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023. The learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the delay that occurred has been elaborately explained in paragraph no. 6 of the application and he prays that the delay of 137 days be condoned. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned Amicus Curiae have no any objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. This court has gone through the explanation provided in paragraph-6 of the application and being convinced with the explanation, the prayer for condonation of delay of 137 days is allowed. Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of as allowed. Registry is directed to list the connected Criminal Appeal accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant