- (1.) dated 21.09.2011 reads as follows: "The Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Dumka, has sent a petition on behalf of the Appellants to clarify whether their sentences, awarded by the trial court, are to run concurrently or consecutively. Mr. K.P. Deo, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that if the judgment is silent whether the sentences would run concurrently or not, it will be deemed that the sentences should run concurrently. He further submitted that the Appellants will be entitled to some remission also. In the circumstances, it is clarified that the sentences are to run concurrently. The Jail Superintendent will send a fresh report whether the Appellants are entitled to remission or not and if, they are entitled to remission, whether they have completed the sentences of 10 years or not, and, if not, on what date they will be completing the same. Put up this case for further hearing on 14/10/2011. Let the order be sent through FAX."
(2.) Pursuant to the said order, the Superintendent of Central Jail, Dumka sent a report dated 26.09.2011 stating inter -alia that in absence of any order from the court of 4th District and Sessions Judge, Godda on the petition of the Appellants regarding running of their sentences, it was not clear whether the sentences were to run concurrently or not and therefore, Appellants could not be released, though they have completed 10 years R.I. on 10.08.2011, 11.08.2011 and 01.10.2011 respectively after earning remission.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that in view of the order dated 21.09.2011, the Appellants had completed their sentences. He further submitted that the Appellants do not want to press this appeal on merits.;