Meghalaya High Court
Crl.M.C./56/2026 of WELBESTER LANGRIN Vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA on 9 April 2026
No. 02 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 56 of 2026 Date of Decision: 09.04.2026 Shri. Welbester Langrin, Son of Late H. Thongni, Resident of Wahkaji, Mawkyrwat, District South West Khasi Hills. …….. Applicant - Vs- State of Meghalaya represented by
Serial No. 02
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 56 of 2026
Date of Decision: 09.04.2026
Shri. Welbester Langrin,
Son of Late H. Thongni,
Resident of Wahkaji,
Mawkyrwat,
District South West Khasi Hills.
…….. Applicant
- Vs-
State of Meghalaya represented by its
Secretary Home (Police) Department,
Meghalaya.
……… Respondent
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s)
:
Mr. M.F. Qureshi, Legal Aid Counsel.
Mr. L. Koch, Adv.
For the Respondent(s)
:
Mr. R. Gurung, 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. M.F. Qureshi, learned Legal Aid 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 and order of sentence dated 17.10.2025 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), South West Khasi Hills District, Mawkyrwat in Special (POCSO) Case No. 7 of 2023, wherein, he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years with fine of ₹ 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only, and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment of one month.
2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 112 days has occurred, the reason being that the family members of the applicant are facing financial constraints and has no means to engage a private counsel. As such, he could not prefer an appeal within the stipulated period of 60 days. Thereafter, a Legal Aid Counsel was provided to him, and eventually, the appeal was prepared by the Legal Aid Counsel. It is therefore prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted.
3. Mr. R. Gurung, 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 112 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:316 Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2026.04.09 16:42:59 IST Signature Not Verified