Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/1322/2025 of NASIR ALI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 15 March 2026
GAHC010253602025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1322/2025 NASIR ALI S/O. LATE PUNKU ALI, R/O VILLAGE- MESNARKUTI, P.O.- LAKHIGANJ, P.S.- BILASIPARA, DISTRICT- DHUBRI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
GAHC010253602025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1322/2025
NASIR ALI
S/O. LATE PUNKU ALI, R/O VILLAGE- MESNARKUTI, P.O.- LAKHIGANJ, P.S.- BILASIPARA, DISTRICT- DHUBRI, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:DIPANKAR GHOSH
S/O AJAY KR. GHOSH
R/O WARD NO. 3
P.O. AND P.S.- BILASIPARA
DIST- DHUBRI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F HAQUE, MR A ISLAM,MR. S K M ALOMGIR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR A ALIM SK(R2),MR R A AHMED(R2)
Linked Case : OTC/0/0
NASIR ALI
S/O. LATE PUNKU ALI
R/O VILLAGE- MESNARKUTI
P.O.- LAKHIGANJ
P.S.- BILASIPARA
DISTRICT- DHUBRI
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
2:DIPANKAR GHOSH
S/O AJAY KR. GHOSH
R/O WARD NO. 3
P.O. AND P.S.- BILASIPARA
DIST- DHUBRI
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR F HAQUE
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
16.03.2026 Heard Mr. F. Haque, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A.A. Sk, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. This is an application praying for condonation of delay of 1422 days in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Petition. The learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 submitted that he has no objection to the delay being condoned. The learned APP has also not raised any objection. The learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 has, in fact, submitted that the parties have compromised, and the cheque amount has already been satisfied, and that opposite party no. 2 does not now have any grievance against the petitioner. In view of the above, the delay is condoned. The accompanying Criminal Revision Petition be registered and assigned a number and listed before the Court. The I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant