Convict entitled to immediate release upon completion of the full term of the awarded sentence.

The appellant was convicted by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh, in Sessions Case No. 140/2010 on 26.12.2017 for the offense of dacoity under Section 395 of the IPC.

He was sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and a fine of Rs. 200/-, with an additional six months of RI in default of payment.

The appellant challenged this judgment through the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C.

During the pendency of the appeal, a jail report from the Jail Superintendent, District Jail, Raigarh, dated 25.03.2026, revealed that the appellant had already served three years, six months, and five days in custody and had deposited the fine amount, yet remained in jail.

Whether the appellant is entitled to immediate release from custody given that he has already served a period of imprisonment exceeding the sentence imposed by the trial court.

Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) regarding the punishment for dacoity.

Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), governing appeals against convictions by a Sessions Judge.

Precedent established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suresh Singh and Another v. State of Haryana (2007) 13 SCC 518, which recognizes that proceedings may be disposed of when the accused has already undergone the requisite sentence.

The Court’s reasoning centered on the discrepancy between the sentence imposed and the actual time served by the appellant.

The trial court had sentenced the appellant to three years of RI.

The State’s jail report confirmed that as of March 2026, the appellant had served more than three years and six months—exceeding the substantive sentence and the default sentence period combined.

The Court noted that the fine had been deposited, satisfying all conditions of the trial court's order.

By applying the principle from Suresh Singh, the Court determined that since the appellant had already served the entire duration of the sentence during the pendency of the appeal, continued detention was unjustified.

The Court directed the Registry to send the certified copy of the judgment and the original trial records to the concerned trial court for immediate information and compliance.