ANU MALHOTRA
Mahesh Kumar Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anu Malhotra, J. -
CRL.M.(BAIL) 513/2022 in CRL.A. 189/2022
CRL.M.(BAIL) 514/2022 in CRL.A. 192/2022
1. The appellant Mahesh Kumar Agarwal of Crl.A. No. 189/2022 and Nirmal Kumar Agarwal, appellant of Crl. A. No. 192/2022 respectively vide applications, i.e., Crl. M.(Bail) 513/2022 in Crl. A. No. 189/2022 and Crl. M.(Bail) No. 514/2022 in Crl. A. No. 192/2022 filed under Section 389 of the Cr. P.C., 1973, seek the grant of suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal admitted vide orders dated 2.5.2022 in as much as both the applicants have been convicted vide the same impugned judgment dated 21.4.2022 of the learned Special Judge (PC Act), CBI (Coal Block Cases-01), Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi in CC No. 252/2019 and both the applicants have been sentenced vide the same impugned order on sentence dated 25.4.2022 and thus it has been considered appropriate to take up the two applications together.
2. Vide the impugned judgment dated 21.4.2022 in CNR NO. DLCT-11-000961-2019, the applicant Nirmal Kumar Agarwal, the appellant of Crl.A No. 192/2022 has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections (i) u/s 120B IPC, (ii) u/s 120B IPC read with Sect
AVUT V. Sushil Ansal and Anr.; (2017) 3 SCC 788
Ahmed Hussein Vali Mohammed Saiyed vs. State of Gujarat; (2009) 7 SCC 254
Angana and Anr. V. State of Rajasthan; (2009) 3 SCC 767
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. V. Dilbahar Singh; 2014 (9) SCC 78
K.C. Sareen V. CBI, Chandigarh
Kashmira Singh V. State of Punjab (1977) 4 SCC 291
Pritpal Singhal V. State of Delhi; (1999) 1 SCC 169
Ram Narain Popli V. Central Bureau of Investigation (2003) 3 SCC 641
SFIO V. Nitin Johri & Anr. (2019) 9 SCC 165
Sita Ram and Ors. V. State of Uttar Pradesh; (1979) 2 SCC 656
The court has the discretion to suspend the operation of the sentence during the pendency of an appeal, considering factors such as lack of adverse antecedents and the absence of a strait jacket form....
Point of Law : Sections 437 & 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, equally govern the grant of suspension of sentence in terms of Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 to a convict who has assailed the impugned j....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when deciding on the suspension of a conviction, the court should consider irreversible consequences, the individual's criminal antecedents, t....
A court should generally suspend a fixed-term sentence pending appeal unless exceptional circumstances indicate otherwise.
Ordinarily, the superior Court should suspend the sentence of imprisonment in the matters relating to the offence under the PC Act.There is a distinction between suspension of execution of sentence a....
Suspension of sentences for convicted individuals requires a careful assessment of factors including the severity of the offences and the accused's past behavior, particularly health issues during th....
The appellate court's power to suspend sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C is limited to exceptional circumstances; failure to comply with procedural rules results in denial of suspension.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.