Meghalaya High Court
Crl.M.C./207/2026 of JELIUS SYIEM Vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA on 10 September 2026
2026:MLHC:1009
No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 207 of 2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 Shri. Jelius Syiem, S/o (L) David Symbei, R/o Nongrynniang Village, South West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ……… Applicant - Vs - The State of Meghalaya,
Serial No. 01
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 207 of 2026
Date of Decision: 10.09.2026
Shri. Jelius Syiem,
S/o (L) David Symbei,
R/o Nongrynniang Village,
South West Khasi Hills District,
Meghalaya.
……… Applicant
- Vs -
The State of Meghalaya,
Through the Public Prosecutor,
The High Court of Meghalaya,
At Shillong.
……… Opposite Party
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s)
:
Mr. E. Laloo, LAC.
For the Respondent(s)
:
Mr. H. Kharmih, Addl. 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. E. Laloo, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant, who has submitted that the applicant has filed an appeal before this Court, being
Page 1 of 2
aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and related order of sentence dated 12.02.2024 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), South West Khasi Hills District, Mawkyrwat in Special POCSO Case No. 10 of 2021, whereby, he was convicted and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5(five) years with fine of ₹ 5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only, and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment of 1(one) week for an offence punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 879 days has occurred, due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant, being a daily wage labourer and economically backward, moreover, his family members are also not financially sound and has no means to file an appeal or to engage a private counsel. As such, he could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Thereafter, legal aid was sought for, and accordingly, this application was processed through Legal Aid Counsel. 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 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 879 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:1009 Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2026.09.10 17:01:07 IST Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…