DISHOS PALE@CHOS PALE 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 2026-04-22. DISHOS PALE@CHOS PALE v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 19 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl. M. C. No. 59 of 2026 Date of Decision: 22. 04. 2026 Shri. Dishos Pale @ Chos Pale, S/o (L) Bod Pulang, R/o Nongjri, Ladrymbai Outpost, P. S. Khliehriat, East Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya . …….. Applicant/Appellant -Vs- State of Meghalaya represented by the Public Prosecutor. ………… Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. A. Dey, Legal Aid Counsel. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N. D. Chullai, AAG with Mr. E. R. Chyne, 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 Mr. A. Dey, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant, who has submitted that the applicant has preferred an appeal before this Court against the impugned judgment and related order of sentence dated 30. 06.
2023 passed by the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat in Sessions Case No. 76 of 2022, wherein, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10(ten) years with fine of ₹ 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only under Section 377 IPC, and in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment of 5(five) months. 2. However, while preferring an appeal, a delay of 960 days has occurred, due to the fact that after the pronouncement of the said impugned judgment and related order of sentence dated 30. 06. 2023, the applicant was immediately forwarded to the District Prison and Correctional Services, Jowai, as a result of which, he lost all formal communication with his family members. 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. N. D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Mr. E. R. Chyne, 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 960 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: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.