THOMBORLANG SYIEMIONG@THOMBORLIN SYIEMIONG 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 2026-07-29. THOMBORLANG SYIEMIONG@THOMBORLIN SYIEMIONG v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Serial No. 03 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl. M. C. No. 157 of 2026 Date of Decision: 29. 07. 2026 Shri. Thomborlang Syiemiong @ Thomborlin Syiemiong, aged about 29 years, Son of Shri. Sorin Lyngdoh Nonglait (Convict presently serving sentence in Correctional Home & Prisons, Shillong). Resident of Umsawurkali Village, P. S. Nongstoin, District West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya. . …….. Appellant -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 Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Ms. P. Chettri, LAC. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R. Gurung, GA. 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. P.
Chettri, 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 20. 02. 2026 and related order of sentence dated 26. 02. 2026 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin in Special (POCSO) Case No. 8 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(l)/6 of the POCSO Act. 2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 94 days has occurred, due to circumstances which is beyond the control of the applicant/convict, being an illiterate person and hailing from a poor family, is 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. R. Gurung, learned GA appearing for the State respondent has 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 94 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
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.