Disposed¶19

Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon v. The State of Ap and Anr.

Gauhati HC4 May 2026IA(Crl)/85/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

condonation of delay; 329 days; Section 5 Limitation Act 1963; IA(Crl)/85/2024; Gauhati High Court Itanagar Bench; Anjan Moni Kalita; PSG SC (POCSO) Case No.20/2022; Pasighat WPS Case No. 11/2022; Section 354A IPC; Section 354 IPC; Section 10/12 POCSO Act; section 10 POCSO Act; Special Judge (POCSO) Pasighat; judgment dated 30.09.2023; 7 years imprisonment; Rs.10,000/- fine; appeal against POCSO conviction; Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon; State of AP; victim Mis X; Tokmem Dai; C. Ering Legal Aid Counsel; G. Tado Additional Public Prosecutor; V. T. Gurung; Gallen Taloh.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of the delay of 329 days in filing the instant appeal; the interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly. ¶19

Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon Vs The State of Ap… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2026)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040014172024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : IA(Crl)/85/2024

¶5

Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon Son of Shri Raithuibo, resident of Chakha, PO and PS Maram, Senapati, Manipur.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of AP and Anr represented by the PP of AP 2:Mis X Age: 0 Occupation : Victim of PSG SC (POCSO) Case No. 20/ 2022 represented by Miss Tokmem Dai Daughter of Shri Ajom Mengu resident of High Region Colony Pasighat PO and PS Pasighat East Siang District Arunachal Pradesh

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : Gallen Taloh,

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, Legal Aid Counsel,C Ering

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 05-05-2026

¶13

Heard Mr. V. T. Gurung, learned counsel for the applicant. Also

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

heard Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Ms C. Ering, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶16

The instant application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed for condoning a delay of 329 days in preferring the instant appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 30.09.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), in PSG SC (POCSO) Case No.20/2022, corresponding to Pasighat WPS Case No. 11/2022 under Section 354A IPC read with Section 10/12 of POCSO Act, convicting the appellant under Section 354 IPC read with section 10 of POCSO Act and sentencing him to imprisonment of 7 years and directing to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as fine to the victim.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶18

After consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant for condonation of delay, which is not objected to by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 as well as taking into consideration the explanation provided for delay in filing the appeal provided in para-3 to 10 of the application, this Court is of the considered opinion that delay so occurred in filing the instant appeal should be condoned. Accordingly, the delay so occurred of 329 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned

¶19

Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application is disposed of.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

Comparing Assistant

Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon v. The State of Ap and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raithuibo Pamai Nepoleon v. The State of Ap 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

Tai Riyang Vs the State of Ap

Philip Brahma @ Rahul Brahma Vs The State of Ap

Karan Dodum and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Ap

Tangiat Jamoh and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Tenzin Tashi Vs The State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Nyato Riba and Anr. Vs Dammo Riba and Anr.