Allowed¶24

Sri Santanu Nandan Mazumder v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC5 Jan 2026I.A.(Crl.)/554/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay of 190 days; criminal petition against judgment dated 17.08.2024 of learned Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar dismissing Criminal Appeal No. 18/2022; applicant unaware of dismissal due to previously engaged counsel's failure to inform; learnt of dismissal on 24.03.2025; delay held bona fide, supported by affidavit; objection of respondent No.2 rejected; I.A. allowed. Gauhati High Court, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J., order dated 06.01.2026, I.A.(Crl.)/554/2025, neutral citation 2026:GAU-AS:149.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 190 days in filing the instant criminal petition challenging the judgment dated 17.08.2024 in Criminal Appeal No. 18/2022. ¶24

Sri Santanu Nandan Mazumder Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010109522025

2026:GAU-AS:149

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/554/2025

¶6

SRI SANTANU NANDAN MAZUMDER S/O- LATE SARADENDU SEKHAR MAZUMDER. R/O- SHIBABARI ROAD, P.S.- SILCHAR, P.O.- TARAPUR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM. PIN-788003

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM

¶9

2:SRI JOY KUMAR SAHA S/O- LATE ANIL KUMAR SAHA. R/O- N.N. DUTTA ROAD WARD NO.23 P.S.- SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B HUSSAIN, MR SAURADEEP DEY,MR S A BARBHUYAN

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. R BORAH (R-2),MR. R BORUAH (R-2)

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 06.01.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. for the State and Mr. R. Boruah, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶17

This is an application praying for condonation of delay of 190 days in filing

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

the instant criminal petition challenging the appeal against the judgement dated 17.08.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Criminal Appeal No. 18/2022.

¶20

It is stated that the applicant was not aware of the dismissal of this appeal on 17.08.2024 as his previously engaged counsel failed to to inform him about the same and it was only when he went to the Court for enquiry on 24.03.2025 that he came to know that the appeal was dismissed on 17.08.2024. Thereafter, the applicant took steps to collect certified copy and after obtaining the same, he has approached this Court within the 60 days period of limitation.

¶21

However, considering the time from the date of the judgement, a delay of 190 days has occurred which was for bona fide reasons and there was no deliberate or intentional act on the part of the applicant.

¶22

The respondent No.2 has filed objection disputing the contentions the applicant and it is submitted that the applicant has failed to make out of any ground for condonation of the delay.

¶23

Having regard to the causes shown as supported by an affidavit, I am of the view that the delay of 190 days in preferring the instant petition deserves to be condoned.

¶24

Accordingly, the same is condoned and the I.A. is allowed.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Sri Santanu Nandan Mazumder v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Santanu Nandan Mazumder v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Elias Ali Vs the State of Assam

Chinzason Valta Chin Zason Valta Vs the State of Assam

Manash Patar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Abdul Kayum Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Alibe Bhengra Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Newaj Uddin and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Assam