Facts
The appellant, the sole accused, filed a criminal appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 12 March 2018 in S.C. No. 307 of 2015 passed by the Special Court for Cases under the POCSO Act, 2012, Mahila Court, Chennai.
Source reference: p.2, para.1The Trial Court had convicted him under Section 5(h)(i)(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and sentenced him to 10 years’ simple imprisonment and a fine of ₹5,000, with six months’ simple imprisonment in default.
Source reference: p.2, para.2During the appeal, the appellant submitted that he had already completed the sentence and had been released.
Source reference: p.2, para.3The prosecution produced prison records confirming that he was released from Central Prison-I, Puzhal, on 22 March 2025 after serving the sentence.
Source reference: pp.2–3, paras.3–4Issues
Whether the criminal appeal required further adjudication when the appellant had already served the sentence imposed by the Trial Court and had been released from prison.
Source reference: pp.2–3, paras.3–5Whether any further relief could be granted in the appeal against the conviction and sentence in the circumstances of the case.
Source reference: p.3, para.5Law Applied
The Court considered the appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides for an appeal against conviction.
Source reference: p.1; p.2, para.1The conviction and sentence challenged in the appeal arose under Sections 5(h)(i)(m) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Source reference: p.2, para.2The Court applied the procedural principle that where an appellant has fully undergone the sentence imposed and has been released, and no effective relief remains to be granted, the appeal may be dismissed as no longer requiring further adjudication.
Source reference: p.3, para.5Reasoning
The Court did not undertake a merits review of the conviction under the POCSO Act.
Source reference: no citationIt relied on the appellant’s submission that he had completed the sentence and on the official prison proceedings confirming his release on 22 March 2025.
Source reference: pp.2–3, paras.3–4Since the custodial sentence had already been served, the Court concluded that no effective issue remained for adjudication in the appeal.
Source reference: p.3, para.5Holding
The Court held that, in view of the appellant having served the sentence imposed by the Trial Court and having been released, nothing survived for further adjudication.
Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 222 of 2022 was dismissed.
Source reference: p.3, para.5Acts & Sections Cited
3 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Original Court PDF
ANANTHANvsSTATE REP BY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
