Dismissed¶23

Shakti Chauhan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2026JAPL/286/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jail Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence under Section 3(1) of Gangster Act upheld because entire sentence already undergone; appeal not pressed on merits; no useful purpose in detailed examination of evidence once sentence served; Allahabad High Court; Sonbhadra; Special Session Case No.26 of 2019; Case Crime No.147 of 2017; Police Station Karma; seven years rigorous imprisonment; fine Rs.5,000/- each; custody October 16, 2017 to January 23, 2024.

What did the court decide?

None; the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court were upheld. ¶23

Shakti Chauhan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

JAIL APPEAL No. - 286 of 2024

¶3

Shakti Chauhan And 2 Others

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Deepesh	Kumar Ojha
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: A.G.A.,	G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 93

¶10

HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Sharad Yadav, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Deepesh Kumar Ojha, learned for the appellants and Ms. Divya Ojha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State.

¶12

This Jail Appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated January 24, 2024 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) (C.A.W.), Sonbhadra in Special Session Case No.26 of 2019 (State Vs. Shakti Chauhan and others) arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2017, under Section 3(1) of Gangster Act, Police Station Karma, District Sonbhadra whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 3(1) of Gangster Act and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in case of default in payment of fine the appellants shall undergo one month additional imprisonment.

¶13

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.

¶14

During the pendency of this appeal, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant has already undergone the entire period of sentence imposed by the trial court by now.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellants do not wish to press the appeal on merits as the appellants have already completed his entire sentence, reference in this regard is made to the letter dated April 14, 2024 issued by the Superintendent, District Jail, Sonbhadra and till date the appellants were not admitted to bail, meaning thereby, the appellants have served his entire

¶16

JAPL No. 286 of 2024

¶17

¶18

sentence by now. Thus, it is prayed that conviction may be set aside or in the alternative, the sentence may be deemed to have been undergone.

¶19

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent on the strength of report of Superintendent, District Jail, Sonbhadra dated April 14, 2024 submits that as per said letter the appellants remained in jail from October 16, 2017 to January 23, 2024, that is, six years, three months and seven days.

¶20

I have perused the record and considered the submissions of both parties, the appeal has been pending for a long time and as per the report of Jail Superintendent, Sonbhadra dated April 14, 2022, the appellants have served all the imprisonment imposed by learned trial court by now.

¶21

In the aforesaid circumstances of the case where the entire sentence has already undergone and considering the nature of offence and the fact the appellants have already served out their entire sentence, no useful purpose would be served by entering into a detailed examination of evidence at this stage.

¶22

Since the appellants have already undergone the full period of sentence by now, pursuant to order passed by the learned trial Court, therefore, nothing further survives in this appeal for adjudication as the learned counsel for the appellants does not wish press on the merits of the appeal. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial Court is hereby upheld.

¶23

The appeal is dismissed .

¶24

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the jail authorities concerned through Registrar (Compliance) of this Court.

¶25

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.

¶26

February 3, 2026 Dev

¶27

(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakti Chauhan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakti Chauhan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Siyaram Vs State of U.P.

Pooja Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Brij Kishor Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mool Chand Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jamir Ali vs State of U.P. and Another