IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 296 of 2002 Mohd. Rayees S/o Mohd. Hanif R/o 7 Dispensary Road, Police Station Kotwali, Dehradun District Dehradun .……… Appellant. Versus State of Uttarakhand .……… Respondent Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. G.A. for the respondent/State. JUDGMENT Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. G.A. for the respondent/State. 2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant Mohd. Rayees against the Judgment and order dated 26.08.2002 passed by the then learned Sessions Judge, Dehradun in S.T. No. 45 of 2001, State Vs. Sitting and others whereby the appellant Mohd. Rayees and other co- accused have been convicted and sentenced to undergo five years R.I. u/s 307 r/w 34 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine the appellants shall further undergo six months R.I. 3. This is an appeal filed by the appellant Mohd. Rayees through his counsel on 13th November, 2002. Meanwhile the appellant and co-accused Sitting and Rajan sent a jail appeal through Superintendent of Jail on 11th November, 2002. Thus, both these appeals were filed simultaneously in the court. The Jail Appeal No. 285 of 2002 was heard and decided by this court on 5th April, 2004. This court has held in para 14 as under :- “14. For the reasons aforesaid this appeal partly succeed and is to be allowed accordingly. The appeal is allowed. The appellants Rajan and Mohd. Rais are held not guilty and acquitted of the charge under section 307/34 I.P.C. They are in jail and they shall be released forthwith if not wanted in connection with any other case. The conviction of the appellant Sitting under section 307 I.P.C. is maintained. However sentence awarded per judgment and order dated 26.08.2002 by the Sessions Judge Dehradun is modified and reduced to sentence of 4 (four) years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (one thousand). In default of payment of fine the appellant shall further undergo R.I. for 6 (six) months.” 4. In view of the above, the accused/appellant has already been acquitted by this Court. The present appeal (CRLA No. 296 of 2002) also came up for hearing before me and when the trial court record was summoned, it was revealed that the Jail Appeal No. 285 of 2002 has already been decided with the aforesaid directions. 5. In view of the above judgment delivered by this court on 5th April, 2004 in Criminal Jail Appeal No. 285 of 2002, this appeal has become infructuous. 6. The appeal is dismissed as infructuous. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 07.05.2008 Shiv