Gauhati High Court
Sanjib Paul vs The State Of Assam on 24 October, 2025
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010229632025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1141/2025
SANJIB PAUL
S/O LATE NIRANJAN PAUL, RESIDENT OF BHABANIPUR, WARD NO.9, PS-
SONARI, DISTRICT- CHARAIDEO, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM,
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DASGUPTA, MISS R A CHOUDHURY,MR E AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER
Date : 24-10-2025
[M. Choudhury, J]
Heard Mr. E. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms.
B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor for the
opposite party no. 1.
Page No.# 2/3
2. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is
preferred seeking condonation of delay of 125 days, which delay is stated to
have occurred in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The accompanying criminal
appeal has been preferred to assail a Judgment dated 12.12.2024 and an Order
on Sentence dated 19.12.2024 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge,
Charaideo ['the Trial Court', for short] in Sessions [S-C] Case no. 12/2024. By
the Judgment and Order on Sentence, the applicant-appellant has been
convicted for the offences under Section 302 and Section 201, Indian Penal
Code [IPC] read with Section 34, IPC. For the offence under Section 302, IPC
read with Section 34, IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for
life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation. The applicant-
appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years for the
offence under Section 201, IPC read with Section 34, IPC. Both the sentences
are ordered to run concurrently.
3. The applicant-appellant has explained in paragraphs 4 - 9 of the instant
application the reasons for delay of 125 days.
4. Ms. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor has
submitted that since the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence
of murder and has been sentenced for life imprisonment, interest of justice
would be better sub-served if the accompanying criminal appeal is heard on
merit.
5. We have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant
Page No.# 3/3
application, more particularly, paragraphs 4 - 9 thereof.
6. On having gone through the statements and averments made in this
application, we are of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has been
able to explain the period of delay of 125 days showing sufficient cause,
moreover, as the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence of
murder and has been sentenced to life imprisonment, interest of justice would
be better sub-served if the accompanying criminal appeal is heard on merit after
condoning the period of delay.
7. For the afore-said reasons, the instant application is allowed condoning the
delay of 125 days in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal.
8. The Registry to register the accompanying criminal appeal and thereafter, to
list the same in the admission column.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
