Application to condone a 121-day delay in filing a criminal appeal against a Sessions Court conviction judgment was heard; the court held the informant-respondent need not be served for such an application and condoned the delay.
Delay of 121 days in filing Criminal Appeal No. 16/2024 condoned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040007202024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(Crl)/51/2024
Toni Payum Son of Shri Tatak Payum, permanent resident of Mirem village, PO Bilat, PS Ruksin, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP and Anr represented by the PP of AP 2:Tare Tatak Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Shri Tahing Tatak a resident of Lorging Model Village PO Pessing PS Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh (Father of Prosecutrix/ Victim
Advocate for the Petitioner : David Tatak, Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,
– B E F O R E –
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
11.09.2024
(Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)
The matter comes upon for consideration of the application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 with a prayer to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the Criminal Appeal against the
Page No.# 2/2
impugned Judgment and Order dated 04.12.2023 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, East Siang District, Pasighat.
Though the notices issued to the respondents of the application is served upon the State, however, the same has not been served upon the respondent No. 2, who is the first informant. However, for the purpose of condonation of delay, We are of the view that the respondent No. 2-informant is not required to be heard.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant as well as the State and after going through the contents of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, We deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the Criminal Appeal No. 16/2024 on behalf of the applicant. Hence, the I.A. is allowed. The delay of 121 days in filing the Criminal Appeal No. 16/2024 is condoned.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 121 days in filing Criminal Appeal No. 16/2024 against the judgment dated 04.12.2023 should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Toni Payum
The State of AP
Tare Tatak
Vijay Bishnoi
Kardak Ete
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
