Disposed¶23

Ali Azgar Khan v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC12 Mar 2026Crl.Rev.P./128/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; Shamima Jahan; Crl.Rev.P./128/2026; Section 438 BNSS 2023; Sections 442 and 528 BNSS 2023; condonation of delay; 75 days delay in filing appeal; Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025; District & Sessions Judge Barpeta; accident; left knee injury; bed rest; medical certificate; 43 days unexplained delay; order set aside and quashed; reconsideration of condonation application; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 18.12.2025 set aside and quashed; Sessions Judge, Barpeta to reconsider the delay-condonation application in its proper perspective. ¶23

Ali Azgar Khan Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 18.12.2025 set aside and quashed; Sessions Judge, Barpeta to reconsider the delay-condonation application in its proper perspective.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 18.12.2025 of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025, refusing to condone the 75 days' delay in filing the appeal, should be interfered with by this Court.

¶16

Court's answer

Given that the delay was not for a very long period and concerned only 43 days, this Court found the learned Court's treatment of the delay too harsh and interfered with the order dated 18.12.2025.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 18.12.2025 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025 was set aside and quashed, and the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Barpeta was directed to reconsider the application for condoning the delay in its proper perspective.

¶22

Key takeaways

The petitioner had suffered a left knee injury and was advised bed rest for 1 month, and the period within which a person becomes fit to resume duties after bed rest differs from person to person and cannot be ascertained.ratio¶5

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision (Crl.Rev.P./128/2026, Gauhati High Court, decided 13-03-2026) under Section 438 BNSS, 2023 read with Sections 442 and 528 BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 18.12.2025 of the District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025 refusing condonation of a 75 days' delay in filing an appeal against the Trial Court order dated 05.06.2025. The petitioner attributed the delay to an accident causing a left knee injury, medical treatment and one month's advised bed rest, with the medical certificate showing fitness to resume duties on 31.07.2025 though the appeal was filed on 18.09.2025. Holding that the residual 43-day delay was not for a very long period and that fitness after bed rest differs from person to person, the Court found the refusal too harsh, set aside and quashed the impugned order, and remitted the matter to the Sessions Judge, Barpeta to reconsider the condonation application in its proper perspective. Revision petition disposed of.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010012432026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./128/2026

¶6

ALI AZGAR KHAN S/O- YAKUB KHAN. R/O- VILL.- KHANDAKARPARA, UNDER P.S.- HOWLY, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY PP, ASSAM 2:KHAIRUL ISLAM S/O- LATE OMAR ALI. R/O- VILL.- KHANDAKARPARA P.S.- HOWLY DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MD I H LASKAR, MR. M AHMED

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 13-03-2026

¶14

Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State.

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

By this application under Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023 read with Sections 442 and 528 of the BNSS, 2023, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025.

¶17

By the said order dated 18.12.2025 the delay of 75 days in filing the appeal was not condoned and the same was rejected by the learned Court.

¶18

Mr. M. Ahmed has placed the order, wherein it has been specifically stated that after the order was passed by the learned Trial Court on 05.06.2025, the petitioner wanted to file an appeal before the Appellate Court, but he suffered an accident due to which he sustained injuries on his left knee and underwent medical treatment and was in a bedridden condition.

¶19

The medical certificate shows that the petitioner was fit to resume his duties on 31.07.2025. However, the appeal should have been filed on 05.07.2025. The learned Court held that after 31.07.2025, the petitioner should have filed his appeal at best on 05.08.2025, but he filed the appeal on 18.09.2025, without any explanation for the delay of 43 days. It is unknown as to the date fixed by the learned Court that appeal should have been filed on 05.08.2025. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner suffered from left knee injury and he was advised bed rest for 1 month and it cannot be ascertained as to when a person becomes fit to resume his duties, after his bed rest, as it differs from person to person.

¶20

Since the delay is also not for a very long period and the learned Court has

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

considered the delay of only 43 days, which has not been explained, this Court finds it too harsh and as such, interferes with the order dated 18.12.2025. Accordingly, the said order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in Criminal Misc.(J) Case No.19/2025 is set aside and quashed and the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Barpeta would reconsider the application for condoning the delay in its proper perspective.

¶23

The criminal revision petition is disposed of.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Ali Azgar Khan v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Azgar Khan 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilwar Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Sri Preetam Rout and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Bharat Chetia Vs Sri Rituparna Das

Abul Kalam Azad Vs Rashida Khatun

Ashad Ali Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Nazmul Islam @ Nazmul Ali and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam