Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KUMAR, K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ.
Sunil – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 136 of 2026 (arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.17943 of 2025)
Decided On : 08-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's prolonged incarceration and appeal delays. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. consideration of lesser role and delay warrants bail. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 3. grant of suspension of sentence and bail ordered. (Para 7 , 9 , 11) |
ORDER
Leave granted.
2. The appellant, Sunil, is aggrieved by the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in I.A. No. 4061/2025 in C.R.A. No. 6177/2019, denying him suspension of sentence and consequential bail pending the hearing of his criminal appeal.
3. The appellant, Sunil, has been in prison for over 7 years and 8 months as on date.
4. We are informed that there is no possibility of his appeal being heard any time in the near future, as the High Court Bench at Indore is presently dealing with appeals of the years 2010-2012.
5. Further, two of the co-accused who were attributed much larger roles than that assigned to the appellant by the prosecution have already been granted suspension of sentence/bail, albeit after completion of 13 years of incarceration.
6. Given the lesser role attributed to the appellant, Sunil, and the fact that his appeal may not be heard soon, we are of the opinion that he would be entitled to grant of relief at this stage.
7. The appellant, Sunil, is accordingly directed to be released on suspension of sentence/bail, pending the hearing of his appeal, on such appropriate terms and conditions as may be fixed by the trial court.
8. In addition, the appellant shall be physically present before the High Court on each date of hearing of his appeal.
9. The appeal is accordingly allowed, setting aside the impugned judgment/order passed by the High Court.
10. We clarify that we have not made any observations/comments on the merits of the case and any observation made in this order is meant only for the limited purpose of grant of suspension of sentence/bail.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
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.
The court may suspend a sentence pending appeal if the appellant has served a significant portion of the sentence and other co-accused have been granted suspension.
The court suspended the appellant's sentence and granted bail due to the lengthy delay in appeal proceedings and the time already served.
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 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 court determines that bail should be granted pending appeal where there is a considerable delay in proceedings and the sentenced term is not life imprisonment.
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
