Badal Vishwas Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:18250

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 141 of 2016

¶6

Badal Vishwas S/o Parbal @ Aarban Vishwas Aged About 28 Years R/o Purulia West Bengal R/o In Front Of C.G. Hospital, Daldal Savini, Police Station Pandary, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pandary, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Appellant	:	Mr. Arvind Prasad, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr.
		Samir Singh, Advocate
For Respondent/State	:	Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel lawyer

¶12

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge)

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

22/04/2025

¶15

1. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of

¶16

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (henceforth ‘the CrPC’) questioning the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.12.2015 passed by the Court of Third Additional Session Judge, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Session Trial No. 251 of 2013, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced rigorous imprisonment for 05 years and fine amount of Rs. 5000/- ,in default of payment of fine amount six months additional rigorous imprisonment.

¶17

2

¶18

When the case is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the appellant by the concerned trial court has already been completed . He further submits that the appellant has already been released from jail on 14.12.2017, as such, instant criminal appeal becomes infructuous . In support of this he submitted a report received from the Central Jail, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶19

1. Learned State counsel supported the report received from the Central jail, Raipur, District Raipur , Chhattisgarh. And 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:-

¶20

“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 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. 06).”

¶21