← Library
Madras High CourtCRL A/211/2010disposed of

Muthu v. The State By

2019-04-15Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.04.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.A.No.211 of 2010 Muthu @ Muthappan @ Kuttappan ... Appellant/Accused No.1 Vs The State by Inspector of Police, Erode Taluk Police Station, Crime No.19 of 2001, Erode District.

... Respondent/Complainant Prayer:- This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order of Conviction, dated 22.07.2005, made in S.C.No.3 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Erode convicting the appellant under Sec.395 r/w 397 IPC by sentencing him to undergo 8 years R.I. with fine of Rs.500/- i/d to undergo 6 months R.I.

For Appellant : Mr.N.Manokaran Mr.D.Gopal For Respondent : Mrs.S.Thankira Government Advocate (Crl.Side) JUDGEMENT This Criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.07.2005 made in S.C.No.3 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Erode, wherein the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo 8 years RI with fine of Rs.500/- & i/d to undergo 6 months R.I., for offense under Section 395 r/w 397 IPC. 2.When the matter is taken up today, the learned Government Advocate submitted that apart from this case, the appellant/Muthu @ Muthappan @ Kuttappan was tried along with one Pandi in S.C.No.4 of 2005 and along with one Arumugam @ Murugan in S.C.No.5 of 2005. The appellant had been convicted and sentenced to undergo nine years RI in S.C.No.5 of 2005 and eight years RI in S.C.Nos.3 & 4 of 2005 and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3.It is further submitted by the learned Government Advocate that so far as the appellant/Muthu @ Muthappan @ Kuttappan is concerned, the sentence was not suspended and he https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

was not granted bail and as per the prison manual, he was given remission of 709 days and that having served the entire period of sentence, he was released on 23.01.2011. It is further submitted by the learned Government Advocate that the connected appeal in C.A.No.51 of 2010, which was filed by the 1st appellant herein/Muthu @ Muthappan @ Kuttappan against the judgment in S.C.No.5 of 2005, was disposed of by this Court on 10.07.2018 stating that the appellant having served the entire period of sentence, nothing survives for adjudication in the appeal. 4.The learned counsel for the appearing for the appellants would submit that he has already returned the bundles to his client and also intimated his client/appellant herein. 5.In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate that the appellant has already served the entire sentence and released from jail, nothing survives for adjudication in this appeal. Accordingly the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Co) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gbi To:

1.The Judge, Principal Assistant Sessions Court, Erode.

2.The State by Inspector of Police, Erode Taluk Police Station, Crime No.19 of 2001, Erode District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Crl.A.No.211 of 2010 AD(CO) TSG(28/05/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/