State of Karnataka Vs Mustak Ahamed S/O Noor Mohammed

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(1) & (3) OF Cr.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 3/3/2012 PASSED IN CRL. APPEAL No.390/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALORE AND CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION PASSED BY THE JMFC-II COURT, MANGALORE, DATED 7/11/2008 IN C.C.No.156/2008 - CONVICTING THE RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 & 25 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT, 1959.

¶26

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

The State has filed this appeal praying to set-aside

¶30

the judgment dated 03.03.2012 passed in Crl.A.No.390/2008 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru and affirm the judgment of conviction passed in C.C.No.156/2008 dated 07.11.2008 by the learned J.M.F.C (II Court), Mangaluru.

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:34 CRL.A No. 617 of 2012

¶33

Respondent Nos.1 to 3 were accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.156/2008 and they faced trial for the offence under Section 3 r/w Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 came to be convicted for the said offence by judgment dated 07.11.2008 passed in C.C.No.156/2008 and they have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have challenged the said judgment of conviction and order on sentence before the Sessions Court in Crl.A.No.390/2008. Learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru by judgment dated 03.03.2012 has set-aside the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 07.11.2008 passed in C.C.No.156/2008 by the J.M.F.C (II Court), Mangaluru and acquitted respondent Nos.1 to 3 for the offence under Section 3 r/w Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. The said judgment passed by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.390/2008 has been challenged in this appeal.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:34 CRL.A No. 617 of 2012

¶36

Learned High Court Government Pleader for the

¶37

appellant has filed a memo with a copy of the letter dated 06.01.2025 sent by the Superintendent, District Prison, Mangaluru, wherein, it is stated that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have completed their sentence of one year simple imprisonment and they have also undergone in default sentence. Learned High Court Government Pleader placing reliance on the said letter submits that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have already undergone the sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008 and in view of the same, the appeal does not survive for consideration.

¶38

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 also submits that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have completed their term of sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008.

¶39

Considering the above said aspect, even if the judgment of acquittal of respondent Nos.1 to 3 passed by the appellate Court is set-aside and conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008 is upheld, the judgment to be passed in this appeal has no practical

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:34 CRL.A No. 617 of 2012

¶41