As per case facts, Rajesh Manger, the applicant, sought condonation of a significant delay in filing an appeal against his conviction under the POCSO Act. The delay was attributed to ... his legal counsel's negligence, who misplaced the case file after receiving it from the legal services authority, leading to 426 days of delay. The respondent, the State of Sikkim, opposed the application, arguing that no sufficient cause was shown for such a substantial delay since the judgment was pronounced well before the appeal filing. The question arose whether the inadvertent negligence of the applicant's counsel, causing a considerable delay in filing the appeal, qualified as "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay, thereby allowing the appeal to proceed. Finally, the High Court of Sikkim concluded that the delay was indeed not due to any fault of the applicant but was solely caused by the admitted forgetfulness and negligence of his counsel. Emphasizing that an applicant should not suffer due to their counsel's errors, the Court deemed the explanation for the delay as "sufficient cause." Consequently, the Court condoned the delay, disposing of the interlocutory application, and admitted the main appeal for further proceedings, including calling for trial court records and preparing paper-books.