KAMAL KUMAR THAPA v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE W. DIENGDOH,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. BHATTACHARJEE
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2026-02-06. KAMAL KUMAR THAPA v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl. M. C. No. 6 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06. 02. 2026 Shri. Kamal Kumar Thapa S/o Smti. Tulsi Devi R/o Nongmensong Umkdait, Shillong, Meghalaya. ……….. Applicant -Vs- State of Meghalaya through Superintendent of Police, East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya. ………… Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Ms. S. Nongsiej, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Khan, PP with Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP. Mr. H. Kharmih, Addl. PP. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc. : ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No Per W. Diengdoh, (J): JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard Ms. S. Nongsiej, learned counsel for the applicant, who has submitted that an appeal has been preferred by the applicant, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 27. 08. 2025 and order of sentence dated 28. 08.
2025 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills District, Shillong in Special (POCSO) Case No. 1 of 2014 under Section 5(l)/6 POCSO Act read with Section 328/365/366A/376 IPC, whereby, by such judgment and order of sentence, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 20(twenty) years with fine of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only, and in default thereof, to undergo further imprisonment for 6(six) months. 2. However, while preferring the said appeal, a delay of 51 days has occurred due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant, as such, he could not prefer an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. It is therefore prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be admitted. 3. Mr. K. Khan, learned PP assisted by Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. PP appearing for the State respondent has no objection to the prayer made. 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 51 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. 02. 06 18:20:58 IST
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.