Application for condonation of 423 days delay by a convict filing an appeal from jail. Court noted legal aid counsel engagement and lack of objection from the State. Delay condoned; appeal registered.
Condonation of delay of 423 days and order to register and list the connected criminal appeal.
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
GAHC010186362026
2026:GAU-AS:13733
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/930/2026
JYOTI BORAH
SON OF LT. DHANI RAM BORAH, R/O VILL.- BORAGAON, GORCHUK, P.S.PALASHBARI, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. S KHATANIAR (LEGAL AID COUNSEL),
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
16.09.2026
Heard Ms. S. Khataniar, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.
2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is preferred by the applicant
Page No.# 2/2
for condonation of delay of 423 days in preferring connected criminal appeal from jail.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant Jyoti Borah stood convicted in Sessions Case No.199/2014, arising out of Palashbari P.S. Case No.55/1997 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation under Section 448 IPC and also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation under Section 326 IPC and also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- with default stipulation under Section 307 IPC.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that she has been engaged in this matter as legal aid counsel two weeks back by the High Court Legal Services Committee and in the meantime, the period of limitation for preferring connected appeal has already been elapsed and that the appeal is preferred from jail and that the delay is not intentional, rather it is circumstantial and under such circumstances, she has contended to condone the delay and to admit the appeal.
5. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. submits that he has no objection in the event of condonation of delay of 423 days in preferring the connected appeal.
6. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and the explanation forthcoming for the delay, this Court is inclined to condone the delay of 423 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal.
7. Now the Registry will register and number the connected appeal and list the same before the Court as soon as practicable.
Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay of 423 days in filing a connected criminal appeal from jail warrants condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jyoti Borah
The State of Assam
Robin Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
