Shivashankar Amarannavar, J
1. The State has filed this appeal praying to set-aside the judgment dated 03.03.2012 passed in Crl.A.No.390/2008 by the learned III Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru and affirm the judgment of conviction passed in C.C.No.156/2008 dated 07.11.2008 by
the learned J.M.F.C (II Court), Mangaluru.
2. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 were accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.156/2008 and they faced trial for the offence under Section 3 r/w Section 25 of the
Indian Arms Act, 1959. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 came to be convicted for the said offence by judgment dated 07.11.2008 passed in C.C.No.156/2008
and they have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each. Respondent Nos.1 to 3
have challenged the said judgment of conviction and order on sentence before the Sessions Court in Crl.A.No.390/2008. Learned III Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru by judgment dated 03.03.2012 has set-aside the judgment of conviction and order on
sentence dated 07.11.2008 passed in C.C.No.156/2008 by the J.M.F.C (II Court), Mangaluru and acquitted respondent Nos.1 to 3 for the offence
under Section 3 r/w Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. The said judgment passed by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.390/2008 has been
challenged in this appeal.
3. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the appellant has filed a memo with a copy of the letter dated 06.01.2025 sent by the Superintendent,
District Prison, Mangaluru, wherein, it is stated that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have completed their sentence of one year simple imprisonment and they
have also undergone in default sentence. Learned High Court Government Pleader placing reliance on the said letter submits that respondent Nos.1 to
3 have already undergone the sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008 and in view of the same, the appeal does not survive for consideration.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 also submits that respondent Nos.1 to 3 have completed their term of sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008.
5. Considering the above said aspect, even if the judgment of acquittal of respondent Nos.1 to 3 passed by the appellate Court is set-aside and
conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.156/2008 is upheld, the judgment to be passed in this appeal has no practical effect as the respondent Nos.1
to 3 have already completed the term of sentence.
6. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of.
