Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1005 of 1991 Appellant :- Sher Singh @ Shara Respondent :- State Counsel for Appellant :- V.C.Katiyar,Prashant Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 02.05.1991 of Sri Siya Ram, H.J.S., First Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad, passed in Sessions Trial No. 379 of 1989 connected with Sessions Trial No. 232 of 1990 State vs. Sher Singh alias Shera and others whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment under Section 25(i) Arms Act.
The appellant has been tried for offence under Section 307 and 25/27 Arms Act. The trial court after going through the evidence on record has found that there was no public witness and only police witnesses have appeared before the court. Their testimonies do not stand corroborated by any independent public witness. The appellant has been acquitted for offence under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and held guilty of offence under Section 25(i)(a) Arms Act and has been sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that he was enlarged on bail by this court by the order dated 13.05.1991. The order sheet of this court shows that on account of his non-appearance of appellant non-bailable warrant was issued by this court on 08.03.2018 and in pursuance he was sent to jail and was enlarged on bail by this court by the order dated 25.07.2018.
Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the appellant was arrested on 20.02.1990 and was directed to be released on bail on 03.01.1991 therefore he was in jail for about 10 months and was on bail during trial and has also been in jail for about 4 months during the pendency of this appeal. He already undergone more than six months of sentence awarded to him.
Since the appellant has already undergone the entire sentenced awarded to him therefore this appeal has become infructuous. Appellant is on bail. Bail bond and sureties furnished by the appellant stand discharged.
Let the lower court record be sent back to the court below.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 Rohit