Allowed

Ajay Robidas @ Ajay Robi Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC12 Mar 2026I.A.(Crl.)/494/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone 1041 days' delay in filing an appeal against a POCSO conviction, filed from jail with legal aid assistance. No objection from either side; delay condoned and appeal directed to be registered.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 1041 days in preferring the appeal condoned; Registry directed to register the appeal and reflect the Amicus Curiae's name.

Ajay Robidas @ Ajay Robi Das Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010097872025

2026:GAU-AS:3679

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/494/2025

¶6

AJAY ROBIDAS @ AJAY ROBI DAS S/O. LT. HORU ROBI DAS, R/O. ATTABARI 1 NO LINE, P/S. DEMOW, DISTRICT SIVASAGAR, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM

¶9

2:RAJ KUMAR MIRDHA S/O. SRI. KULA MIRDHA R/O. ATTABARI 1 NO. LINE P/S. DEMOW DISTRICT SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN-785662

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS S MEDHI, MS. M K BROWN, (AMICUS CURIAE TO ASSIST THE COURT)

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, AMICUS CURIAE TO ASSIST THE COURT

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 13-03-2026

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

Heard Ms. S. Medhi, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, the learned Addl. PP appearing on behalf of the State Respondent and Ms. M.K. Brown, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent no. 2. 2. This is an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 1041 days in preferring the connected appeal against the order of conviction passed in Special (POCSO) Case No. 25/2018 by learned Addl. Sessions Judgecum- Special Judge (POCSO), Sivasagar.

¶17

3. It is submitted by Ms. Medhi that as the case has been filed from the jail, the appellant could not make any contact with the Legal Aid Service Authority of the High Court and somehow with the help of the Superintendent, matter was referred to the Legal Aid Service Authority of the High Court and accordingly she has been engaged by a Legal Aid Counsel and thus there is a delay of 1041 days. However, there was no intentional laches on the part of the appellant in preferring the appeal.

¶18

4. Mr. Sharma, the learned Addl. PP raised no objection in condoning the delay and in the same time Ms. M.K. Brown, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent no. 2 also did not raise any objection in condoning the delay.

¶19

5. In view of this and also for the ends of justice, the present Interlocutory Application for condoning the delay of 1041 days in preferring the appeal is hereby allowed considering the grounds mentioned in the petition is the justified grounds.

¶20

6. Registry will do the needful in registering the connected appeal and matter may be listed after registering and numbering.

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

7. The Registry is also hereby directed to reflect the name of Ms. M.K. Brown as an Amicus Curiae at the time of registering the appeal.

¶23

8. With the above observations, this Interlocutory Application stands disposed

¶24

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Ajay Robidas @ Ajay Robi Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Robidas @ Ajay Robi Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anam and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Ms. Meghali Barua Vs Kinjalk Saikia and 2 Ors.

Khokshed Miya Alias Nekai and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Sahil Ali Ahmed Vs the State Oif Assam

Esha Hoque Ali Vs the State of Assam

Piku Deka Alias Piku Kumar Deka Vs the State of Assam