Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/2 vs The State Of Nagaland on 4 March, 2021
Author: S. Shyam
Bench: Suman Shyam
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010036152021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.A./58/2021
LIPISE SANGTAM AND 2 ORS
S/O- TSUPISU SANGTAM, VILLAGE- PHELUNGRE, P.O. AND P.S. KIPHIRE,
DISTRICT.- KIPHIRE, NAGALAND.
2: HANTONG KONYAK
S/O- NYEIE KONYAK
VILL.- CHINGLONG KONYAK
P.O. AND P.S. ABOI
DIST.- MON
NAGALAND.
3: NGAMPHONG KONYAK
S/O- LONGANG KONYAK
VILL.- TOTOK
P.O. AND P.S. MON
DIST.- MON
NAGALAND
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND
REP. BY THE P.P., NAGALAND.
Advocate for the Appellants : MR. A ZHO
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, NAGALAND
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 04-03-2021 (S. Shyam, J) We have heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. We have also heard Mr. K. Wotsa, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Nagaland, who has appeared from Kohima through remote video conferencing and submits some time is required to examine the records and address this Court. He submits that the LCR is at Guwahati and hence, it could not be examined.
The appellants have been allowed to go on bail by the order dated 04-03-2021 passed in I.A. (Crl.) 122/2021 arising out of this appeal.
It appears that the learned P.P. would have to refer to the LCR during hearing of the appeal. As such, this appeal cannot be finally heard through remote V.C., but the matter would have to be heard physically.
In view of the above and as agreed to by the learned counsel for both sides, Registry to examine as to whether the case records are required to be transmitted back to Kohima for conducting physical hearing of the appeal and do the needful.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant