Meghalaya High Court
Date Of Decision: 03.03.2026 vs State Of Meghalaya on 3 March, 2026
Author: W. Diengdoh
Bench: W. Diengdoh
2026:MLHC:137
Serial No. 01
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 22 of 2026
Date of Decision: 03.03.2026
Shri. Bhupen Rabha,
S/o (L) Horkeshore Rabha,
R/o Manikganj Village,
P.S Mendipathar, North Garo Hills District,
Meghalaya.
........... Petitioner
-Vs-
State of Meghalaya
Through the Commissioner &
Secretary to the Government of
Meghalaya,
Department of Home (Police),
Civil Secretariat, Shillong.
............ Respondent
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S. Chanda, Legal Aid Counsel.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Abraham, GA.
Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press: Yes/No
1
2026:MLHC:137
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. Heard Mr. S. Chanda, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the
petitioner, who has submitted that an appeal has been preferred by the
appellant, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of
conviction dated 20.10.2023 and related order of sentence dated 03.11.2023
passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), North Garo Hills
District, Mendipathar in Special (POCSO) Case No. 22 of 2017 under Section
8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, wherein, he was directed to undergo simple
imprisonment for a term of 3 years and 6 months along with fine of ₹ 10,000/-
(Rupees ten thousand) only, and in default thereof, to undergo an additional
simple imprisonment of 2 months.
2. However, because the petitioner is an indigent person with no
support from his family members or relatives, therefore, legal aid was sought
for, and accordingly, this application was processed through Legal Aid
Counsel.
3. In the meantime, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 801 days
has occurred, for which prayer is made that the delay be condoned and the
appeal be admitted.
4. Mr. H. Abraham, learned GA along with Mr. S. Sengupta, learned
Addl. PP appearing for the State respondent has no objection to the prayer
made.
2
2026:MLHC:137
5. On consideration of the submission made, this Court is inclined to
allow this application on being satisfied that the grounds cited for the delay
contain sufficient cause. Accordingly, the delay of 801 days in preferring the
appeal is hereby condoned.
6. Registry is directed to diarize the appeal and list it for admission
after 1(one) week.
7. Misc. Case disposed of.
Judge
Signature Not Verified 3
Digitally signed by
DARIKORDOR NARY
Date: 2026.03.03 16:57:46 IST