AJAY GOWALA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
criminal appeal is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
AJAY GOWALA S/O. SRI. BHAKA GOWALA, R/O. NO. 1 ULTAJAN GAON, P/S. BOGIJAN, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:DIMPI GOWALA D/O. LT. BULKU GOWALA W/O. MANIK GOWALA PERMANENT R/O. NO. 1 ULOTAJAN GAON P/S. BOGIJAN DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT DOLAMARA P/S. BOGIJAN DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B HALDAR, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
04.08.2025 ORDER Page No.# 2/3 Heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party no. 1-respondent State of Assam. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of 102 days, which period of delay is stated to have occurred in filing the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 against a Judgment and Order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge –cum- Special Judge [POCSO], Golaghat in Special POCSO Case no. 82/2019 under Sections 448/376[1], Indian Penal Code [IPC]. For the offence under Section 376[1], IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- thousand, with default stipulation. For the offence under Section 448, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently. I have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant interlocutory application, more particularly, paragraph nos. 3 & 6 thereof. Having gone through statements and averments made in this application regarding the period of delay in filing the connected appeal, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant- appellant has been able to explain the period of delay of 102 days showing sufficient cause. Moreover, as the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years, interest of justice will be better subserved if the appeal is heard on merits leaving aside the technical aspects as regards the delay. The Court is also of the considered view that service of notice upon the opposite party- respondent no. 2/informant can be dispensed with at this stage, as the matter of delay is an aspect which is to be considered by the Court on the backdrop of explanation provided for the delay.
Operative part
In any view of the matter, the accompanying criminal appeal, if admitted, is to be heard on merits only after ensuring service of notice upon victim/informant/guardian/support person. The instant application seeking condonation of delay of 102 days in filing the accompanying criminal appeal is allowed. The Registry to register the criminal appeal and thereafter to list the appeal for admission. Page No.# 3/3 JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: criminal appeal is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 415; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 448.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.