HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD JAIL APPEAL No. - 6249 of 2017 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Ms. Rashmi Srivastava, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Ms. Divya Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State respondent. 2. This jail appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 31.8.2017 learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-I, FAtehpur in Criminal Trial No.345 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.65 of 2013, under Sections 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Ghazipur, District Fatehpur, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :- Under Section 307 I.P.C. - to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine the appellants shall undergo one year additional rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 504 I.P.C. - to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment All the sentences shall run concurrently. 3. The appeal has been filed, challenging the conviction and sentence of appellants on various grounds including earliest infirmities in appreciation of evidence of failure to consider certain material contradiction in the testimony of witnesses. 4. During the pendency of this appeal, it is brought to the notice of this Court Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : , From Jail, Miss.Rashmi Srivastava, Narendra Kumar, Rashmi Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.G.A. Ram Singh Yadav .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. .....Respondent(s) that the appellants have already undergone the entire period of sentence imposed by the trial court. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant Ram Singh Yadav was arrested on 23.4.2013 as is evident from parcha no.3 (reference in this regard is also made to paragraph no.17 of the impugned judgement), and thereafter, the appellant remained in jail from the date of judgement, that is, on 31.8.2017. It is further submitted that neither during trial nor after conviction the appellant was admitted to bail. Thus, by now the appellant has completed his all sentence including the default sentence. 6. Learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant do not wish to press the appeal on merits as the appellant has already completed his entire sentence including the default sentence and prays that conviction may be set aside or in the alternative, the sentence may be deemed to have been undergone. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent could not controvert the submission made by learned Amicus Curiae. 8. I have perused the record and considered the submissions of both parties. There appears substance in the submissions of the learned Amicus Curiae and is also evident from the material available on record. The appeal has been pending for a long time. 9. In the aforesaid circumstances of the case where the entire sentence has already undergone and considering the nature of offence and the fact the appellant has already served out his entire sentence including the default sentence, no useful purpose would be served by entering into a detailed examination of evidence at this stage. 10. Since the appellant has already undergone the full period of sentence including the default sentence pursuant to order passed by the trial Court, therefore, nothing further survives in this appeal for adjudication as the learned counsel for the appellant does not wish press on the merits of the JAPL No. 6249 of 2017 2 appeal. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial Court is hereby upheld. 11. The appeal is dismissed. 12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the jail authorities concerned through Registrar (Compliance) of this Court. The jail authority concerned is directed to release the appellants on completion of sentence, if not wanted in any other case. 13. Ms. Rashmi Srivastava, 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. 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. April 22, 2026 Dev JAPL No. 6249 of 2017 3 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad