HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3846 of 2017 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Ms. Seema Pandey, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the appellant; Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State. 2. This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated May 16, 2017 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Court No.2, Varanasi in Special Criminal Case No.09 of 2014 (State Vs. Rajeshwar Mahato), arising out of Case Crime No. N.C.B. 14 of 2013, under Sections 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. N.C.B. Varanasi, District Varanasi, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 8Ga/20(Kha) (Sa) of N.D.P.S. Act for a period of ten years imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.1.25 lakh and in case of default in payment of fine the appellant shall undergo one year additional rigorous imprisonment. 3. The appeal has been filed, challenging the conviction and sentence of appellant on various grounds including earliest infirmities in appreciation of evidence of failure to consider certain material contradiction in the testimony of witnesses. 4. Learned Amicus Curiae referring to the report of the Senior Superintendent, Central Jail, Varanasi dated August 26, 2024 (a copy of said report is available on record) submits that as per the said report the appellant has completed all the sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court as on October 22, 2023 and since the appellant has defaulted in payment of fine, therefore, the appellant serving out his default sentence of one year from October 22, 2023 which period comes to an end on October 22, 2024, and Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Anant Prakash Mishra, Parmeshwar Kr. Chaudhary, Seema Pandey (Ac) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashish Pandey, G.A., Sanjay Kr Singh Rajeshwar Mahato .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. .....Respondent(s) thus, the appellant has completed all the awarded sentence and default sentence by October 22, 2024. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that she does not wish to press the appeal on merits as the appellant has already completed his entire sentence and has also completed his default sentence and prays that conviction may be set aside or in the alternative, the sentence may be deemed to have been undergone. 5. Learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent on the strength of custody certificate submits that appellant has completed all sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court. 6. I have perused the record and considered the submissions of the parties, the appeal has been pending for a long time and as per the custody report dated August 26, 2024 from the concerned jail authority, the appellant has served out all the imprisonment imposed by learned trial Court as is evident from the letter dated August 26, 2024. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances of the case where the entire sentence has already undergone and considering the nature of offence, no useful purpose would be served by entering into a detailed examination of evidence at this stage. 8. Since the appellant has already undergone the full period of sentence as well as the default sentence pursuant to order passed by the trial Court, therefore, nothing further survives in this appeal for adjudication as the learned Amicus Curiae does not wish press on the merits of the appeal. 9. Moreover, a conspectus of the materials available in this case would pave way to conclude that the charges under which the accused have been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court have been established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. This Court does not find any infirmity either legally or factually in the judgment challenged before this Court. The ingredients of the provisions of law under which the accused have been charged have been proved. The conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court need not be disturbed. The judgment challenged before this Court deserves to be confirmed and accordingly, it is confirmed. This appeal has to suffer dismissal. 10. The appeal is dismissed. 11. The Senior Superintendent, Central Jail, Varanasi is directed to release the appellant on competition of sentence, if not already, released. CRLA No. 3846 of 2017 2 12. Ms. Seema Pandey, learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the appellant has rendered her valuable assistance to the Court. She be paid Rs.10,000/-, towards her fee for the able assistance provided by her in hearing of the present appeal. 13. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the jail authorities concerned through Registrar (Compliance) of this Court. 14. A copy of this judgment alongwith the trial court record be transmitted to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. Compliance report be submitted to this Court, at the earliest. Office is directed to keep the compliance report on record. March 12, 2026 Dev CRLA No. 3846 of 2017 3 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad