Meghalaya High Court
Crl.M.C./98/2026 of THAKUR POHLONG Vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA on 8 June 2026
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl. MC No. 98 of 2026 Date of order: 08.06.2026 Shri Thakur Pohlong, Aged about 42 years S/o Barli Pohlong, R/o Nongbarehrim Village, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya ….Appellant Vs 1. The State of Meghalaya, Represented by Commissioner &
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl. MC No. 98 of 2026 Date of order: 08.06.2026
Shri Thakur Pohlong,
Aged about 42 years
S/o Barli Pohlong,
R/o Nongbarehrim Village,
West Jaintia Hills District,
Meghalaya
….Appellant
Vs
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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.
1. The State of Meghalaya, Represented by Commissioner & Secretary, Home Department (Police) Government of Meghalaya.
…. Respondents
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
i) Whether approved for reporting in
Yes/No
Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication
in press:
Yes/No For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Ms. D.D. Fancon, LAC
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. J.N. Rynjah, GA.
ORDER (ORAL)
1. Heard Ms. D.D. Fancon, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner, who has submitted that the petitioner herein, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.05.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), West Jaintia Hills District, Jowai in Special Session(POCSO) No.2/2022, whereby the appellant was convicted under section 9(k) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and u/s 11 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and also sentenced to undergo Serial No. 04 Regular List 2026:MLHC:547
imprisonment of 6 years with fine, both the sentence to run concurrently, has now approached this Court by way of an appeal.
2. However, while preferring such appeal, a delay of 676 days have occurred, the reason being that the appellant is from an economically backward and illiterate person, who is not aware of his right to file appeal, and was not in a position to engage a private counsel. On the basis of these compounded factors, there have been a delay in the process of filing the related appeal.
3. It is prayed that the delay in filing the same may be condoned, since there are good grounds for the appeal to succeed, further submits the learned Legal Aid Counsel.
4. Mr. J.N. Rynjah, learned GA has entered appearance on behalf of the State respondent, and has submitted that the State has no objection to the prayer made for condonation of the delay and the appeal to be heard on merits.
5. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, though this Court is also concerned with the inordinate period of delay, nevertheless, for end of justice, this Court is inclined and persuaded by the reasons cited in this application.
6. Accordingly, the prayer made herein is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
7. Registry is directed to register the appeal and list the same for admission after 2(two) weeks.
8. This Crl.MC. No. 98 of 2026 is disposed of.
(W. Diengdoh) Judge Meghalaya 08.06.2026 “Khraw”
2026:MLHC:547 Digitally signed by KHRAWDAPBOR BUHPHANG Date: 2026.06.08 18:15:28 IST Signature Not Verified