Allahabad High Court

RAJU AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 April 2026
Bench: VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL

Holding

The appeal is dismissed and the conviction and sentence are upheld because the appellants have already completed the full term of imprisonment and do not wish to press the merits.

Summary

The appellants Raju, Sunny and Satish were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (363, 366, 368, 323, 376(2)(G), 328, 315 and 120‑B) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment with fines, the sentences to run concurrently. They filed a jail appeal challenging the conviction and sentence, alleging errors in the appreciation of evidence. While the appeal was pending, the appellants completed the entire term of imprisonment, including the default periods, as shown by custody certificates. The appellants thereafter sought either a setting aside of the conviction or, alternatively, a deeming of the sentence as served, and indicated they would not press the appeal on its merits. The High Court, after noting the custody reports and the appellants' wish not to pursue the merits, held that no further issue remained for adjudication and upheld the conviction and sentence, dismissing the appeal and directing the jail authorities to release the appellants.

Issues considered

Whether a jail appeal can be entertained when the appellant has already served the entire sentence, including default periods.
Whether the conviction can be set aside or the sentence deemed to have been served in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 315, 323, 328, 363, 366, 368, 376

Subjects

jail appeal
conviction
sentence completion
Indian Penal Code
rigorous imprisonment
default sentence
appeal dismissed
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

JAIL APPEAL No. - 233 of 2021

Raju And 2 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : From Jail, Sumit Goyal
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.G.A.

Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Abhay Pratap Singh; Sri Sachin Singh and Sumit Goyal, learned
counsel for the appellants and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the
State respondent.

2. This jail appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order dated
21.12.2007 learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-II,
Saharanpur in Session Trial Nos.93 of 2013, 94 of 2013 and 470 of 2013
arising out of Case Crime No.241 of 2012, under Sections 363, 366, 368,
323, 376(2)(G), 328, 315 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar,
District Saharanpur, whereby the appellants namely Raju, Sanni and Satish
have been convicted and sentenced as under :-

Under Section 363 I.P.C. - to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.

Under Section 366 I.P.C. - to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.10,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.

Under Section 368 I.P.C. - to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.10,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.
JAPL No. 233 of 2021
2

Under Section 376(2)(G) I.P.C. - to undergo ten years rigorous
imprisonment along with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default in
payment of fine the appellants shall undergo six months additional
imprisonment.

Under Section 328 I.P.C. - to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.5,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.

Under Section 315 I.P.C. - to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.10,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.

Under Section 120-B I.P.C. - to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment
along with fine of Rs.5,000/-and in case of default in payment of fine the
appellants shall undergo six months additional imprisonment.

All the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. The appeal has been filed, challenging the conviction and sentence of
appellants on various grounds including earliest infirmities in appreciation of
evidence of failure to consider certain material contradiction in the testimony
of witnesses.

4. During the pendency of this appeal, it is brought to the notice of this Court
that the appellants have already undergone the entire period of sentence
imposed by the trial court.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of this Court
towards the custody certificate which has been filed alongwith this jail
appeal, as per said certificate the sentence undergone by the appellants as on
27.3.2021 is as under:-

(i). Appellant No.1 Raju - 6 years 5 months and 27 days.
JAPL No. 233 of 2021
3

(ii). Appellant No.2 Sunny - 4 Years 6 Months and 4 days.

(iii). Appellant No.3 Satish - 4 Years and 28 days.

6. Thus, it is submitted that by now i.e. on 6.4.2026 the appellants have
undergone the entire sentence including the default sentence.

7. Sri Abhay Pratap Singha and Sri Sachin Singh, learned counsel for the
appellant has produced recent custody certificate of the appellant Sastish, as
per which appellant Satish has undergone 10 years 10 months and 30 days,
the said certificate is taken on record.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants do not wish to press the appeal on
merits as the appellants have already completed their entire sentence
including the default sentence and prays that conviction may be set aside or
in the alternative, the sentence may be deemed to have been undergone.

9. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent on the
strength of custody certificate, which has been annexed with this jail appeal
submits that appellants have already completed their entire sentence
including the default sentence.

10. I have perused the record and considered the submissions of both parties,
the appeal has been pending for a long time and as per the custody report
from the concerned jail authority, the appellant has served all the
imprisonment imposed as is evident from the custody report dated
27.3.2021, which has been filed alongwith this jail appeal.

11. In the aforesaid circumstances of the case where the entire sentence has
already undergone and considering the nature of offence and the fact the
appellant has already served out his entire sentence including the default
sentence, no useful purpose would be served by entering into a detailed
examination of evidence at this stage.

12. Since the appellant has already undergone the full period of sentence
JAPL No. 233 of 2021
4

including the default sentence pursuant to order passed by the trial Court,
therefore, nothing further survives in this appeal for adjudication as the
learned counsel for the appellant does not wish press on the merits of the
appeal. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial
Court is hereby upheld.

13. The appeal is dismissed.

14. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the jail authorities
concerned through Registrar (Compliance) of this Court. The jail authority
concerned is directed to release the appellants on completion of sentence, if
not wanted in any other case.

15. A copy of this judgment alongwith the trial court record be transmitted to
the Court concerned for necessary compliance. Compliance report be
submitted to this Court, at the earliest. Office is directed to keep the
compliance report on record.

April 6, 2026
Dev
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
DEV PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…