NAR SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

The appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 (2) IPC and have been sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and fine

of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation, vide judgment dated 23.05.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mungeli, in Sessions Trial No.5 of 2005.

Initially the appellant had engaged a Lawyer to contest his case. However, subsequently the lawyer appeared before the court and during hearing

on 08.07.2009 submitted before the court that the appellant has taken NOC from his office. Subsequently, since there was no representation, a notice

from the court was sent to the appellant who was then in jail. Thereafter, legal aid counsel was appointed on behalf of the appellant to pursue the

case. This was in the year, 2009.

The State counsel today, on instructions from the jail authority, intimate the court that the appellant has completed his substantive jail sentence and

has released from jail on 06.07.2010.

Since 06.07.2010 onwards the appellant does not appear to be keen in contesting the appeal and has not entered appearance, nor has he pursued

with the matter before the legal aid counsel for an early disposal of the appeal. It appears that the appellant has lost interest in challenging the

impugned judgment of conviction as he has already completed the jail sentence and has been released from jail on 06.07.2010.

In view of the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, since the appellant has already undergone the entire substantive sentence and released from jail

on 06.07.2010, this court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be considered in this case. Nor is the appellant showing any keen interest in

pursuing the appeal as there is no representation on his behalf inspite of being out of jail. The appeal thus, by efflux of time has now become

infructuous.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.