Disposed

Chiraton Gaur v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Sept 2026EC/966/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this interlocutory application, the Gauhati High Court condoned a delay of 372 days in filing a connected criminal appeal against a conviction and sentence by the Court of Sessions Judge. The applicant cited financial constraints and lack of awareness regarding legal remedies as grounds for the delay. The prosecution did not object to the condonation of delay. The court deemed it fit to condone the delay and directed the registry to register and list the appeal for admission.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 372 days in filing the connected criminal appeal was condoned. Registry directed to register the appeal and list the same for admission.

Chiraton Gaur Vs the State of Assam — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010156692025

2026:GAU-AS:13544

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶5

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

¶6

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/966/2025

¶7

CHIRATON GAUR

¶8

S/O. LT. GANA GAUR, R/O. MORAKARDOI GURI, P/S. BOKAJAN, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BISWAS, FOR LEGAL AID

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER

¶15

14.09.2026

¶16

Heard Ms D Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr S Biswas, learned

¶17

Legal Aid Counsel, appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶18

By this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant

¶19

has prayed for condoning 372 days’ delay in filing the connected criminal appeal against

¶20

the Judgment and Order passed on 10.05.2024, by the Court of Sessions Judge, Karbi

¶21

Page No.# 2/3

¶22

Anglong, in Sessions Case No. 66 of 2010, arising out of Bokajan PS Case No. 92 of 2007. By the said Judgment and Order, the applicant was convicted under Section 326 of IPC, as well as under Section 308 of the said Code. The applicant was sentenced to undergo SI for a period of three years with fine and default stipulation under Section 326 IPC as well as to undergo SI for period of 3 years with fine and default stipulation under Section 308 of the IPC.

¶23

The applicant has narrated the reasons for delay in the said application at Paragraph-3. It is stated that the Judgment and Order was pronounced on 10.05.2024, by the Court of Sessions Judge, Karbi Anglong, in Sessions Case No. 66 of 2010. However, it is stated that the applicant was having financial constraints and he was also unaware of the legal remedies available to him. He is further not aware that the remedy lies before the High Court. The learned counsel further submits that on 26.05.2025, the necessary documents were sent to the Legal Aid Counsel and thereafter, some time was taken in drafting the said connected appeal and the same resulted in a delay of 372 days.

¶24

Mr B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however, does not object to the condonation of the delay and submits that the matter be heard on merit.

¶25

On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court deems it fit to condone the delay of 372 days’ delay in filing the connected appeal.

¶26

The Registry is directed to register the Criminal Appeal (Jail) and list the same for

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

admission.

¶29

7. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Chiraton Gaur v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chiraton Gaur v. the State of Assam

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