Appellant convicted under Section 304-II IPC and sentenced to 7 years RI had already served the full sentence and deposited the fine. With confirmation from jail records and counsel not pressing the appeal on merits, the criminal appeal was disposed of.
Appeal disposed of as infructuous since sentence was fully served; no further relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 / 3
2024:CGHC:30494
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1475 of 2017
1 - Bishnath Yadav S/o Late Shri Kurtiram Yadav, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Netanar, Schoolpara, Police Station Tongpal, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
... Appellant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tongpal, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
... Respondent
| For Appellant | : Shri G.V.K.Rao, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For Respondent/State | : Shri Arpit Agrawal, PL |
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judgment On Board
12/08/2024
Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment dated 31.07.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Bastar, Dantewada in S.T. No. 198/2016 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 304-II of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation.
2 / 3
appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 304-II IPC for 7 years RI 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 24.06.2022 as such, the instant criminal appeal be disposed of accordingly.
“12. It appears that thereafter on 22.01.2007, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 1497 was filed wherein it was stated that Devender Singh (Accused No.1) had expired. Death certificate was also produced along with the application. It was further stated that Jai Bhagwan (Accused No.2), Jai pal (Accused No.4) and Shamsher Singh (Accused No.5) be permitted to withdraw from Special leave 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 No.3) and Jagbir Singh, Appellant 2 (Accused No.6.”
3 / 3
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)
Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date: 2024.10.17 03:53:18 -0400
Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be disposed of given the appellant has already completed the sentence awarded for the offence under Section 304-II IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Suresh Singh and Another Vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶5
(2007) 13 SCC 518 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bishnath Yadav
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tongpal, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
Arvind Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
