Meghalaya High Court
Crl.M.C./70/2026 of ORES MASHARING Vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA on 24 April 2026
No. 02 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 70 of 2026 Date of Decision: 24.04.2026 Shri. Ores Masharing, Son of Late Blur Sun, (Convict presently serving sentence in Ri-Bhoi District Jail, Nongpoh) Resident of Kyrdem Village, P.S. Umiam, District Ri-Bhoi, State:
Serial No. 02
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 70 of 2026
Date of Decision: 24.04.2026
Shri. Ores Masharing,
Son of Late Blur Sun,
(Convict presently serving sentence in
Ri-Bhoi District Jail, Nongpoh)
Resident of Kyrdem Village,
P.S. Umiam, District Ri-Bhoi,
State: Meghalaya
…….. Applicant
- Vs-
State of Meghalaya through the
Commissioner & Secretary to the
Government of Meghalaya,
Department of Home (Police),
Shillong, Meghalaya.
……… Respondent
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s)
:
Mr. S. Khyriem, Adv.
Mr. S. Thapa, Adv.
Ms. S. Khatun, Adv.
For the Respondent(s)
:
Mr. K.P. Bhattacharjee, GA.
Mr. H. Abraham, GA.
i)
Whether approved for reporting in
Yes/No
Law journals etc.:
ii)
Whether approved for publication
in press:
Yes/No
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
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.
1. Heard Mr. S. Khyriem, learned counsel for the applicant, who has submitted that the applicant has filed an appeal before this Court, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment dated 14.10.2025 and related order of sentence dated 16.10.2025 passed by the Court of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Ri-Bhoi District, Nongpoh in Sessions Case No. 91 of 2015 under Section 302 IPC.
2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 130 days has occurred, due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant, as such, he could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. It is therefore prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted.
3. Mr. K.P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA 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 130 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:396 Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2026.04.24 17:14:59 IST Signature Not Verified