Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/27/2026 of SHRI DEZOTO RHAKHO Vs THE STATE OF NAGALAND on 17 June 2026
GAHC020004792026 2026:GAU-NL:358 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/27/2026 SHRI DEZOTO RHAKHO S/O LATE VEMJUJI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF TOULAZUO VILLAGE, P.S. DIPHUBAR, DIMAPUR - 797112, NAGALAND VERSUS THE
GAHC020004792026
2026:GAU-NL:358
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/27/2026
SHRI DEZOTO RHAKHO
S/O LATE VEMJUJI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF TOULAZUO
VILLAGE, P.S. DIPHUBAR, DIMAPUR - 797112, NAGALAND
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, NAGALAND
Advocate for the Petitioner : KONLI BUCHEM, IMLIMENLA
IMCHEN,KEVISERIENUO,YUKHAKOKLA,MAONGKALA,NOCKLEI M
KONYAK,KONLI BUCHEM,WAPANGLEMLA
Advocate for the Respondent : P.P, NAGALAND, BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
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
18-06-2026 Heard Ms. Wapanglemla, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. E. Thiba Phom, learned PP for the State.
2. The instant interlocutory application has been preferred seeking to invoke the provisions of section 401(5) CrPC (Section 442 (5) BNSS).
3. It has been stated and submitted that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide impugned judgment and order dated 30.10.2018 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dimapur in RC no. 04/2006 under section 465/468/471/419/120B & 34 IPC. For such conviction, he was imposed with a concurrent sentence of 1 year RI.
4. The petitioner preferred the criminal revision petition, but subsequently, came to know that a statutory appeal lies against the impugned judgment and order and, accordingly, seeks to invoke section 401(5) of the criminal procedure to convert the criminal revision petition into a criminal appeal.
5. Mr. E. Thiba Phom, learned PP fairly submits that he has no objection.
6. Section 401(5) Cr.PC (section 442 (5) BNSS) may be reproduced herein below: “401(5) Where under this Code an appeal lies but an application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly.”
7. A person convicted and sentenced under criminal law is conferred with a substantive right of appeal and there is no reason to not invoke the provision of the procedural law, to allow the prayer of the applicant.
8. Accordingly in exercise of powers under section 401(5) Cr.PC (section 442(5) BNSS) – the criminal revision being CRL.REVN/10/2018 is hereby converted into a criminal appeal. The Registry shall register and renumber the same.
9. The interlocutory application stands allowed and disposed of.
10. As CRL.REVN/10/2028 has already reached the stage of hearing, therefore, after the aforesaid exercise on the part of the Registry, the proceeding in the form of criminal appeal may be put up for hearing after the vacation.
11. Original TCR is already available. JUDGE Comparing Assistant