Madhu vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 4210 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                         NC: 2023:KHC:24017
                                                         CRL.A No. 1940 of 2017




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                               BEFORE
                                THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1940 OF 2017
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    MADHU
                            S/O. PARASHURAM,
                            AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
                            R/AT NEAR BHUVANESHWARI TEMPLE,
                            18TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN,
                            N.S. PALYA,
                            BTM LAYOUT, II STAGE,
                            BENGALURU.
                                                                   ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. DANAPPA P PANIBHATE, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
                            BENGALURU.
Digitally signed by                                              ...RESPONDENT
BHAVANI BAI G
Location: High        (BY SRI. S. VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP)
Court of Karnataka


                           THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
                      374(2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
                      AND ORDER DATED 21.10.2017 PASSED BY L ADDITIONAL
                      CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALOER IN
                      SPL.C.C.NO.466/2014     -  CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/
                      ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
                      363, 344, 366, 376 OF IPC.

                           THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
                      DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   -2-
                                         NC: 2023:KHC:24017
                                              CRL.A No. 1940 of 2017




                             JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 374(2)

of Cr.P.C. where the Trial Court found the appellant guilty,

convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven

years and fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under

Section 376 of IPC and in default, he shall further undergo

simple imprisonment for four months and further sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for three years and fine of

Rs.3,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC

and in default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for three

months and simple imprisonment for two years and fine of

Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 344 of IPC,

in default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for two

months and simple imprisonment for one year and fine of

Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 366 of IPC,

in default, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for

one month and all the sentences are ordered to run

concurrently.

2. The appellant was in jail during the pendency of the

trial and he was in jail from 17.05.2012 till 07.11.2016,

subsequently, once again he was arrested on 15.09.2017 and

NC: 2023:KHC:24017 CRL.A No. 1940 of 2017

till passing the judgment i.e., on 21.10.2017, he was in jail.

Almost 4 years 6 months, he was in jail and after filing the

appeal, the I.A. was dismissed and he was continued to be in

jail and from last 6 years, this appeal is pending. Hence, the

learned High Court Government Pleader was directed to verify

the status of the accused in jail. Accordingly, learned High

Court Government Pleader submitted that the accused has

already served the sentence and released from jail as on

09.12.2019 itself.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant is also absent.

The appellant has also lost the interest as he has already

undergone the sentence and released from jail. Therefore,

nothing survives for consideration in this appeal and no

purpose will be served by hearing this appeal on merits by

engaging any Amicus Curiae. Therefore, the appeal is liable to

be dismissed for having become infructuous.

4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for having

become infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE GBB