Meghalaya High Court
Crl.M.C./40/2026 of ANAND SWARUP RAI Vs STATE OF MEGHALAYA on 24 March 2026
No. 02 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 40 of 2026 Date of Decision: 24.03.2026 Shri Anand Swarup Rai Son of (L) Ramprit Rai, (Convict presently serving sentence at District Jail, Jowai). Resident of Chakhaje Village, P.S. Tisiauta, Vaishali District, Bihar.
Serial No. 02
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 40 of 2026
Date of Decision: 24.03.2026
Shri Anand Swarup Rai
Son of (L) Ramprit Rai,
(Convict presently serving sentence at
District Jail, Jowai).
Resident of Chakhaje Village,
P.S. Tisiauta, Vaishali District, Bihar.
…….. Applicant/Petitioner
- Vs-
State of Meghalaya through the
Commissioner & Secretary to the
Government of Meghalaya,
Department of Home (Police),
Civil Secretariat, Shillong.
……… Respondent
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s)
:
Ms. R. Dutta, Legal Aid Counsel.
Mr. S. Chanda, Adv.
For the Respondent(s)
:
Ms. S. Shyam, 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 Ms. R. Dutta, 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 dated 06.12.2024 and related order of sentence dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat in POCSO Case No. 26 of 2021 under Section 7/8/9(m)/10 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 408 days has occurred, due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant, inasmuch as, there was no support from his family members/relatives, as such, he could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. 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. Ms. S. Shyam, 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 408 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:264 Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2026.03.24 17:53:21 IST Signature Not Verified