1 2025:CGHC:3791 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 170 of 2021 1 - Mansingh Vishvakarma S/o Shri Manharan Vishvakarma Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Mohtara, Police Station Kota , District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kota , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent/State For Appellant : Shri Suresh Tandon, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri G.L.Uikey, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Judgment on Board 21/01/2025 The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Bilaspur (CG) in Special Case No. 119/2017, by which the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable U/s 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a term of 5 years & 2 fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months. 3. When the case is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial Court for the offence punishable under the aforesaid Sections for 5 years has already been completed and fine amount has already been deposited. He further submits that the appellant might have already been released from jail on 28.04.2022, as such, instant criminal appeal be disposed of accordingly. 4. When the case is taken up for hearing, learn counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, for 5 years, has already been completed and the fine amount has been deposited by him. He further submits that he has already been released from jail on 28.04.2022 and as such, the instant criminal appeal be disposed of accordingly. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection to the above submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the dictum rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Suresh Singh and Another v. State of Haryana reported in (2007) 13 SCC 518. Paragraph-12 of the said judgment is relevant for the purpose,which is reproduced below for easy reference :- “12. It appears that thereafter on 22.01.2007, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 1497 was filed wherein it was stated that Devender Singh (Accused 1) had expired. Death certificate was also produced along with the application. It was further stated that Jai Bhagwan (Accused 2), Jai Pal (Accused 4) and Shamsher Singh (Accused 5) be permitted to withdraw from special leave 3 petition since all the three had already undergone the sentence and special leave on their behalf had become infructuous. The said application was allowed by the Court and the prayer was granted. Thus, out of the six accused only two have remained viz.Suresh Singh, Appellant 1 (Accused 3) and Jagbir Singh, Appellant 2 (Accused No.6).” 6. Since the appellant had already served the entire sentence and released on 28.04.2022 after availing benefit of remission and after depositing the fine amount before the trial Court and the learned counsel for the appellant does not want to press this appeal on merits, the instant criminal appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.04.16 15:40:22 +0530