Meghalaya High Court

Crl.M.C./97/2026 of CHANDRA MOHAN JHA Vs THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, SHILLONG SUB ZONAL OFFICE on 22 July 2026

2026:MLHC:752

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 97 of 2026 Date of order: 22.07.2026 The Deputy Director, Directorate of Chandra Mohan Jha vs Enforcement, Shillong Sub Zonal Office Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG

Crl.M.C. No. 97 of 2026 Date of order: 22.07.2026

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Chandra Mohan Jha vs Enforcement, Shillong Sub Zonal Office

Coram:

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Applicant : Mr K. Paul, Sr Adv. with

Mr A.P. Singh, Adv.

Mr S. Khyriem, Adv.

Mr S. Chanda, Adv.

For the Respondent : Mr N. Khera, Adv. with

Mr R. Kharkrang, Adv.

By this miscellaneous application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of about 115 days caused in filing the aforesaid appeal. The appeal assails the order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, PMLA, New Delhi and the order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, PMLA.

2. We have heard learned Senior Counsel for the applicant and Mr N. Khera, learned counsel for the respondent. We have perused the application and in particular, reasons set out in paragraphs 3 Serial No. 02 Daily List 2026:MLHC:752-DB

Page 1 of 2

to 8. We find that the applicant has shown sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 115 days caused in filing the aforesaid appeal. The application is accordingly allowed and the delay of 115 days caused in filing he appeal is condoned.

3. Application is disposed of, accordingly.

4. Before we part with the order, we may note that pursuant to the order dated 06.07.2026, two responsible Officers from the respondent Office – Shri Bikram Gangwar, Deputy Director and Shri Shekhar Kumar, Assistant Director – are present in Court. The Officers were to appear, so that the matter was not required to be adjourned for want of instructions from the said authority.

(W. Diengdoh) (Revati Mohite Dere)

Judge Chief Justice

2026:MLHC:752-DB Digitally signed by SYLVANA LIZ KHARBHIH Date: 2026.07.23 16:08:51 IST Signature Not Verified

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead