The accused Nos.1 and 2 in Sessions Case No.23/1997 on the file of the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge. Hassan have challenged in this appeal the Judgment and Order dt.26th September 2003 passed in the said case convicting these accused – appellants for the offence punishable under Sec.372 R/W Sec.34 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-with default sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of another six months.

2. The present appeal was filed by accused – appellants on 25.11.2003 and it came to be listed for the first time on 8.12.2003. None represented the appellant on the said date. Therefore, it came to be adjourned to 6.1.2004 on which date, the learned State Public Prosecutor was directed to take notice on behalf of the respondent – State and the appeal came to be admitted, and records were called for.

3. Thereafter, the appeal did not see the light of the day till 12.3.2009 on which date the arguments were heard in part and the appeal was ordered to be listed on 13.3.2009 for further arguments. On 28.5.2009 this appeal came to be released from part heard. Thereafter, this appeal came to be listed on 30.6.2009, on which date it was noticed that despite this appeal coming up for final hearing from 3.6.2009. on each date of hearing, the learned counsel for the appellants had remained absent and therefore, bailable warrants were ordered to be issued against the appellants for Rs.10,000/-each requiring them to appear before this Court on 25.8.2009.

4. On 25.8.2009 Smt. M.D. Anuradha Urs and Sri A. Ramesh Gowda, the learned advocates appeared for the appellants and arguments of Sri Ramesh Gowda, the learned counsel for the appellants were heard in part and the appeal came to be adjourned to 27.8.2009, on which date, both the accused – appellants appeared before this Court and submitted that since they completed their term of sentence of imprisonment and also paid the fine imposed on them by the Trial Court, they came to be released from the prison.

5. In view of the above submission of the appellants, Sri Satish Girji, the learned High Court Government Pleader, submitted that as on this date, since both the accused have completed their term of sentence of imprisonment and have also paid fine, the present appeal filed by them challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court has become infructuous and therefore, the same may be dismissed accordingly. As against this submission Sri A. Ramesh Gowda, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though this appeal has become infructuous, these appellants had been falsely implicated in the said case and therefore, arguments on merits be heard and appeal be disposed of on merits because, the Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence, if allowed to remain on record, would badly affect the future of these accused – appellants. Accepting these submissions, this appeal came to be listed on 14.9.2009 for final hearing. Arguments of Sri Ramesh Gowda, the learned counsel for the appellants and also arguments of Sri A.V. Ramakrishna, the learned High Court Government Pleader are heard on merits and perused the impugned Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence and also the entire material found in the original records obtained from the Trial Court.

6. Stated in brief the case of the prosecution could be gathered from Ex.P4 complaint filed by the complainant, namely PW.2 Chaluvaiah, the father of victim girl, is as under:

.(a) On 25.11.1996 Monday at about 5 p.m. both the accused Nos.1 and 2 who were known to the complainant, came to him and told that they had seen a boy for his daughter Savithri (PW.3 victim girl) at Bangalore and therefore, if the complainant and his daughter could accompany them to Bangalore, they could see the boy. Believing his words the complainant and his daughter Savithri both accompanied both the accused.