I.A.(Crl.)/568/2025 MD AMIRAT ALI v. THE STATE OF ASSAM & Anr.

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K SEN, MR A HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA Date : 02.06.2025 [Manish Choudhury, J.] ORDER Heard Mr. B.K. Sen, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party- respondent no. 1, State of Assam. Page No. 2/3

The instant interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of eighty-six days in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal. The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal, Criminal Appeal [Jail] no. 4835/2025 [Filing Number] under Section 415[2], Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 to assail a Judgment and Order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge–cum–Special Judge [POCSO], Morigaon [‘the Special Court’, for short] in POCSO Case no. 124/2023. By the Judgment and Order dated 21.12.2024, the learned Special Court has found the applicant-appellant guilty for the offences under Section 376AB, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012. In view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced under Section 6, POCSO Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, which means imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life, and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another three months.

We have gone through the statements and averments made in this interlocutory application, more particularly, Paragraphs 3 and 4 thereof. The impugned Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence was passed on 21.12.2024. It is found that steps were taken by the Superintendent of District Jail, Morigaon to approach the District Legal Services Authority, Morigaon on 03.03.2025 to extend legal assistance to the applicant-appellant and it was on 05.04.2025, the District Legal Services Authority, Morigaon forwarded the matter to the High Court Legal Services Committee for extending free legal aid services to the applicant-appellant.

Ms. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the opposite party-respondent no. 1, State of Assam has fairly submitted that since the applicant- appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, the interest of justice would be better sub-served if the connected appeal is heard on merits after effecting service of notice on the opposite party-respondent no. 2. Page No. 3/3

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 eighty-six days showing sufficient cause.

We are also of the considered view that since the applicant-appellant has been convicted under Section 376AB, IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and he has sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for natural life, interest of justice will be better sub-served if the connected appeal is heard on merits expeditiously after condoning the period of delay of eighty-six days. The issuance of notice to the opposite party-respondent no. 2 is dispensed with at this stage as at the stage of hearing the connected criminal appeal, service of notice upon the opposite party-respondent no. 2 is to be ensured and the opposite party-respondent no. 2 would be heard, if the opposite party-respondent no. 2 enters appearance after service of notice.

The Registry to register the connected appeal and thereafter, list the same in the admission column. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant