RAFIQ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in these two connected appeals by the seven appellants Rafiq, Abbas, Akhtar, Asagar All alias Tunta, Afsar Ali, Kalian and Buddha are to the judgment of their conviction for offences under section 399/402 IPC and imposed sentence of five years R.I. respectively for each of those offences. Four of the appellants Asagar Ali alias Tunta, Afsar Ali, Kalian and Buddha have further challenged their conviction under section 25 of the Arms Act and imposed sentence of one year RI therefor) vide impugned judgment and order dated 20.1.1981, recorded by IInd Additional Sessions, Rampur in Ses- sion Trial No. 229/1980 connected with S.T. Nos. 230/80, 231/80, 232/80, 233/80, 300/80 and 356/80, State of U.P. v. Asagar Ali alias Tunta and others. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) BEFORE proceeding further, it is noted that when Criminal Appeal No. 400 of 1981, Asagar Ali alias Tunta and others v. State of U.P. was called out, nobody appeared to argue it for the appellants and hence Sri. Vinay Saran, advocate was appointed as Amicus Curiae to argue the appeal. Learned Amicus Curiae after perusal of the record informed the Court that in the aforesaid appeal three of the appellants Asgar Ali alias Tunta, Afsar Ali and Kalian had expired and in that respect, there exist on the record a detailed report from CJM, Rampur, dated 28.10.2009. Sri Vinay Saran further pointed out that so far as fourth accused Buddha is concerned, he had already served out entire period of his sentence and after serving out the same has been released from jail on 27.3.1984 and in that respect there is a fax communication on the record of the connected appeal, sent by CJM, Rampur dated 6.9.2007. Perusal of page Nos. 2 and 3 of the aforesaid report supports the said fact. Learned Amicus Curie, therefore, submitted that so far as Criminal Appeal No. 400 of 1981, Asgar Ali alias Tunta and others v. State of U.P. is concerned, now there remains nothing in the appeal to be decided.

(3.) CRIMINAL Appeal No. 400 of 1981 is therefore decided in the above terms.