Meghalaya High Court
Meghalaya vs Nongstoin on 29 July, 2026
Author: W. Diengdoh
Bench: W. Diengdoh
2026:MLHC:789-DB
Serial No. 05
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.M.C. No. 159 of 2026
Date of Decision: 29.07.2026
Shri. Iaidlang Lyngdoh Kynshi,
S/o Shri (L) Drinshon Lyngdoh Nongrang,
R/o Thangmaw Village,
P.S Mairang,
Eastern West Khasi Hills District,
Meghalaya.
......... Applicant
-Vs-
State of Meghalaya through
Superintendent of Police,
West Khasi Hills District,
Nongstoin, Meghalaya.
......... Respondent
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Ms. C.R. Marak, Adv. vice
Ms. S. Nongsiej, LAC.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Atiar S. Dey, GA.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press: Yes/No
1
2026:MLHC:789-DB
Per W. Diengdoh, (J):
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. Heard Ms. C.R. Marak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms.
S. Nongsiej, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant, who has submitted
that the applicant/convict has preferred an appeal before this Court against the
impugned judgment dated 01.12.2025 and related order of sentence dated
05.12.2025 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), West
Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin in Special (POCSO) Case No. 16 of 2024,
whereby, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
a period of 20(twenty) years with fine of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only,
and in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment of 6(six) months
for an offence punishable under Section 5(m)(n)/6 of the POCSO Act.
2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 178 days has
occurred, due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the
applicant/convict, since he belongs to the below poverty line working as a daily
labourer, and his family members are also not aware of his legal rights to file
appeal or to engage a private counsel. As such, he could not prefer an appeal
within the prescribed period of limitation. Thereafter, legal aid was sought for,
and accordingly, this application was processed through Legal Aid Counsel. It
is therefore prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted.
3. Mr. Atiar S. Dey, learned GA appearing for the State respondent has
2
2026:MLHC:789-DB
no objection to the prayer for condonation of the delay.
4. On consideration of the submission made, we are persuaded to allow
this application on being satisfied that the grounds cited for the delay contain
sufficient cause. Accordingly, the delay of 178 days in preferring the appeal is
hereby condoned.
5. Registry is directed to diarize the appeal and list it for admission after
1(one) week.
6. Misc. Case disposed of.
(B. Bhattacharjee) (W. Diengdoh)
Judge Judge
Signature Not Verified 3
Digitally signed by
DARIKORDOR NARY
Date: 2026.07.29 20:21:35 IST
