Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Abhay S. Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
Mukesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1319 of 2024: arising from SLP (Criminal) No. 2008 of 2024; Decided on : 01-03-2024
Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S. 389 -- suspension of sentence -- there is no such rule which requires accused to undergo 10 years of actual incarceration before application for suspension of sentence and bail is considered -- it all depends on facts of each individual case. [Para 4]
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 392 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal against the conviction is pending before the High Court. Series of applications made by the appellant for suspension of sentence and bail were rejected by the High Court. The last one has been rejected by the impugned order.
4. It is not in dispute that the appellant has undergone actual incarceration for a period of more than 8½ years. The antecedents of the appellant are not brought on record. Perhaps the High Court was under the impression that the application for suspension of sentence and bail cannot be considered, unless the appellant undergoes 10 years of actual incarceration. To say the least, there is no such rule which requires an accused to undergo 10 years of actual incarceration before his application for suspension of sentence and bail is considered. It all depends on the facts of each individual case. Suffice it to say that, considering the pendency of criminal appeals in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, the appeal of the year 2015 is not likely to be heard in near future.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
6. The appellant is entitled to suspension of sentence and bail pending the final disposal of the appeal before the High Court. Therefore, the appellant shall be enlarged on bail.
7. For that purpose, the appellant shall be produced before the trial Court within a period of one week from today. The trial Court shall enlarge the appellant on bail pending the appeal before the High Court on appropriate terms and conditions.
The court suspended the appellant's sentence and granted bail due to the lengthy delay in appeal proceedings and the time already served.
The High Court's denial of suspension of sentence was unjustified given the appellant's lengthy imprisonment and the need for timely appeal consideration.
The court granted bail pending appeal, emphasizing the right to appeal and the potential injustice of prolonged incarceration if the conviction is later overturned.
The principle that suspension of sentence and bail should be granted in cases of fixed term sentences when appeals are unlikely to be heard before the completion of the sentence.
Suspension of sentence and bail may be granted if the applicant has served more than half of a fixed term sentence and the appeal is unlikely to be heard before the sentence is completed.
The court may suspend a sentence if the appellant has served over 10 years and there are no extenuating circumstances for denial of bail.
The right to bail may be granted when an appellant has served a substantial time in custody and exhibits lesser culpability than co-accused already released.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
