D.C.Srivastava - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A. With the consent of the parties counsel, the revision is being finally disposed at this stage.
(2.) THE brief facts are that the revisionist Sona alias Yogendra, on his confession, was convicted and sentenced under Sections 379 and 411, l.P.C. THE trial court awarded a sentence of 9 months' R.I. under Section 379, l.P.C. in addition to fine of Rs. 300 and in default of payment of fine to further R.I. for 1 month. On the second count under Section 411, l.P.C. he was sentenced to undergo 6 months' R.I. An appeal was preferred which was dismissed with modification of sentence that 9 months' R.I. under Section 379, l.P.C. was reduced to R.I. for 6 months and conviction and sentence on the remaining count was maintained. THE order of the appellate court was passed on 28.3.1997. In the judgment of the trial court, it is mentioned that the accused- revisionist was in jail since 29.6.1996. Two sentences were made to run concurrently and this order of the trial court was not disturbed by the appellate court. It, therefore, follows that the maximum period of sentence awarded on the two counts has already been undergone by the revisionist. On the question of payment of fine photostat copy of receipt has been filed today which shows that Rs. 800 were deposited in the concerned court on 26.2.1997, i.e, a date after the judgment of the trial court. Thus for all purposes, the revisionist has undergone the sentences and it is not understood how he is still under detention. Since the revisionist has already undergone the sentences imposed and as modified by the appellate court and has also deposited the fine, this revision has become infructuous. The revision is dismissed as infructuous. The revisionist shall, however, in view of above observation, be released forthwith, unless wanted in some other case.;