Allowed

Ac 8137 Sri Akash Nayak @ Paban v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC15 Sept 2026I.A.(Crl.)/944/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this order dated 16.09.2026, the Gauhati High Court considered an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of a 7-day delay in preferring a connected criminal appeal. The delay was attributed to the time taken by the appointed legal aid counsel for preparation. The court found the explanation sufficient and condoned the delay.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 7 days in preferring the connected appeal is condoned. The Registry is directed to register, number, and list the appeal.

Ac 8137 Sri Akash Nayak @ Paban Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010195162026

2026:GAU-AS:13734

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/944/2026

¶6

AC 8137 SRI AKASH NAYAK @ PABAN

¶7

SON OF LAL NAYAK, RESIDENT OF - BOKAKHAT EKARAJAN TEA ESTATE, POLICE STATION- BOKAKHAT, POST OFFICE- BOKAKHAT, DISTRICTGOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶10

2:SRI BISWAJIT KARMAKAR SON OF LATE CHANDRAKANTA KARMAKAR RESIDENT OF- BOKAKHAT EKARAJAN TEA ESTATE POLICE STATION-BOKAKHAT POST OFFICE-BOKAKHAT DISTRICT- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. B SARMA,

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶15

ORDER

¶16

16.09.2026

¶17

Heard Ms. B. Sarma, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent No.1.

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 7 days in preferring connected criminal appeal from jail.

¶20

3. The learned legal aid counsel for the applicant submits that vide judgment and order dated 30.06.2026, the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat, in Special POCSO Case No.76/2022, convicted the applicant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- with default stipulation simple imprisonment for 2 months under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶21

4. Ms. Sarma, learned counsel for the applicant submits that she has been engaged as legal aid counsel in this matter by the Secretary, Gauhati High Court Legal Services Committee on 27.08.2026 and in preparing the connected appeal and the present application, she took sometime and filed the present application on 07.09.2026 and that the delay is not intentional, rather it is circumstantial and therefore, she has contended to allow this application.

¶22

5. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. submits that he has no objection in the event of condonation of delay of 7 days in preferring the connected appeal.

¶23

6. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and also in view of the explanation forthcoming for the delay, this Court is of the view that the delay is sufficiently explained and accordingly, the same stands condoned.

¶24

7. I.A. stands disposed of.

¶25

8. Now the Registry will register and number the connected appeal and list the same before the Court as soon as practicable.

¶26

Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Ac 8137 Sri Akash Nayak @ Paban v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ac 8137 Sri Akash Nayak @ Paban 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