Meghalaya High Court

Crl.M.C./119/2026 of GAMCHAT N. SANGMA Vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. on 6 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

No. 11 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 119 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 Shri. Gamchat N. Sangma S/o N. Ch. Marak Age. 33 years R/o. Cherangre, West Garo Hills, District, Meghalaya 794002 …Appellant -Versus- 1. The State of Meghalaya represented by

Serial No. 11

Regular List

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA

AT SHILLONG

Crl.M.C. No. 119 of 2026

Date of Decision: 06.07.2026

Shri. Gamchat N. Sangma

S/o N. Ch. Marak

Age. 33 years

R/o. Cherangre, West Garo Hills,

District, Meghalaya 794002

…Appellant

-Versus-

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. The State of Meghalaya represented by Secretary, Department of Home & Police Affairs, Meghalaya, Shillong.

2. The Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Tura Meghalaya.

3. Investigation Officer, Tura Women P.S, West Garo Hills, District, Meghalaya.

4. Officer-in-Charge, Tura Women P.S, West Garo Hills District Meghalaya.

…Respondents

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge

Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. P.T. Sangma, Adv. with

Ms. J.T. Sangma, Adv.

For the Respondent(s)

: Mr. H. Kharmih, Addl. P.P

i) Whether approved for reporting in

Yes/No

Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication

in press:

Yes/No

ORDER (ORAL)

1. Heard Mr. P.T. Sangma, learned counsel for the applicant who has submitted that the applicant while preferring the appeal against the judgment dated 20.04.2026 and order of sentence dated 21.04.2026 passed in Special (POCSO) Case No. 10 of 2021 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Tura, West Garo Hills a delay of 9(nine) days has occurred for which this application has been filed for condonation of the same.

2. Again, the learned counsel has submitted that after the accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment, he was unable to communicate his family members of the same and was unable to prefer the appeal within the stipulated period. Hence the delay.

3. It is therefore prayed that the delay may be condoned to allow the applicant to prefer the related appeal.

4. Mr. H. Kharmih, learned Addl. P.P appears for the State respondent and has no objection to the prayer made.

5. On consideration of the prayer made, this Court is inclined to allow this application on being satisfied that the ground cited contain sufficient cause.

6. Accordingly, the delay of 9(nine) days in preferring the related appeal is hereby condoned.

7. Registry to diarize the appeal and list the same for admission after 1(one) week.

8. Misc. Case disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 06.07.2026 “Tiprilynti–PS” 2026:MLHC:663 Digitally signed by TIPRILYNTI KHARKONGOR Date: 2026.07.06 19:24:00 IST Signature Not Verified

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.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

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