An appeal delay was condoned after the court found sufficient cause for the 34-day lapse.

The applicant sought condonation of a 34-day delay in preferring an appeal against his conviction and sentence by the Special Judge (POCSO), West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin, for offences under Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act read with Section 363 IPC, and under Section 363 IPC.

He attributed the delay to his limited financial means, lack of awareness of legal procedure, and status as the sole breadwinner of his family.

He also sought removal of the survivor, arrayed as respondent No. 3, from the proceedings.

The State did not oppose condonation of the delay.

Whether the applicant had shown sufficient cause to condone the 34-day delay in preferring the appeal.

Whether the survivor’s name should be struck off the array of parties.

The Court applied the sufficient-cause standard for condoning delay, finding that the grounds advanced by the applicant justified condonation.

The judgment cites no specific statutory provision or precedent governing that standard.

It also granted the applicant’s procedural request to remove the survivor from the array of parties.

The Court accepted the applicant’s explanation that his economic and social circumstances and lack of awareness of the appeal procedure caused the delay, and was satisfied that the stated grounds amounted to sufficient cause.

The State’s lack of objection was also noted.

On the separate party-array request, the Court granted the applicant’s unopposed prayer to strike off the survivor’s name.

directed the Registry to diarize the appeal and list it for admission after one week, and ordered that respondent No. 3 be struck off the array of parties.

The miscellaneous case was disposed of.