Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/930/2026 of JYOTI BORAH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 15 September 2026
GAHC010186362026 2026:GAU-AS:13733 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/930/2026 JYOTI BORAH SON OF LT. DHANI RAM BORAH, R/O VILL.- BORAGAON, GORCHUK, P.S.- PALASHBARI, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010186362026
2026:GAU-AS:13733
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/930/2026
JYOTI BORAH
SON OF LT. DHANI RAM BORAH, R/O VILL.- BORAGAON, GORCHUK, P.S.- PALASHBARI, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. S KHATANIAR (LEGAL AID COUNSEL), Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
16.09.2026 Heard Ms. S. Khataniar, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.
2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is preferred by the applicant Page No.# 2/2 for condonation of delay of 423 days in preferring connected criminal appeal from jail.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant Jyoti Borah stood convicted in Sessions Case No.199/2014, arising out of Palashbari P.S. Case No.55/1997 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation under Section 448 IPC and also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation under Section 326 IPC and also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- with default stipulation under Section 307 IPC.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that she has been engaged in this matter as legal aid counsel two weeks back by the High Court Legal Services Committee and in the meantime, the period of limitation for preferring connected appeal has already been elapsed and that the appeal is preferred from jail and that the delay is not intentional, rather it is circumstantial and under such circumstances, she has contended to condone the delay and to admit the appeal.
5. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. submits that he has no objection in the event of condonation of delay of 423 days in preferring the connected appeal.
6. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and the explanation forthcoming for the delay, this Court is inclined to condone the delay of 423 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal.
7. Now the Registry will register and number the connected appeal and list the same before the Court as soon as practicable. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE