Mantu Kalita vs State Of Assam And 2 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2377 Gua

                                                         Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010042262020




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


          I.A.(Crl.)/175/2020

         MANTU KALITA
         S/O- LATE KRISHNA KALITA
         R/O- VILL.- PATIDOIVERELA
         P.S. MISSAMARI
         DIST.- SONITPUR
         ASSAM
         PIN- 784506.


          VERSUS

         STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.
         REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
         ASSAM.

         2:SRI BABUL BHOWMIK @ BABUL DAS BHOWMIK
         S/O- SUKUMAR BHOWMIK @ HARADHAN BHOWMIK
          R/O- VILL.- PATIDOI BHERELA
          P.S. MISSAMARI
          DIST.- SONITPUR
         ASSAM
          PIN- 784506.
          3:SRI SUKUMAR BHOWMIK @ HARADHAN BHOWMIK
         S/O- LATE SUBENDRA BHOWMIK
          R/O- VILL.- PATIDOI BHERELA
          P.S. MISSAMARI
          DIST.- SONITPUR
         ASSAM
          PIN- 784506.
          ------------

Advocate for : MR Z ALAM Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.

Page No.# 2/3

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY Order 19-07-2022

(N. Kotiswar Singh, J)

Heard Ms. S. Nazneen, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. S. Jahan,

learned Additional, P.P. Assam and Mr. D.P. Mandal, leaned counsel for the opposite party nos.

2 & 3.

The present application has been filed for condoning the delay of 59 days in filing the

Criminal Appeal arising out of Judgment and Order dated 13.08.2013 passed by the learned

Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 304/2015 in acquitting the opposite

party nos.2 & 3.

Mr. D.P. Mandal, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3, however, submits

that the application has not been filed by disclosing the correct factual aspects as regards the

receipt of the certified copies of the order dated 13.08.2013 passed by the learned Sessions

Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 304/2015.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that these are bonafide mistakes and not

intentional.

However, we are of the view that though there is a delay of 59 days in filing the

appeal, the reason for delay in filing the appeal is not found to be a prolonged nature as to

shut the door of this Court.

Page No.# 3/3

Accordingly, we are inclined to allow this application by condoning the delay of 59

days.

                                             JUDGE                            JUDGE



Comparing Assistant