Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Jasmeet Singh, J.
Sanjay Tripathi - Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Crl.A. 437 of 2020
Decided On : 29-11-2022
Suspension of sentence during appeal is justified if the appellant has served at least 50% of their sentence, balancing the rights of the appellant with the integrity of the court process.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376 and 342 - Application for suspension of sentence during appeal - Conviction under IPC for 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine - Suspension granted after considering Supreme Court's stance on bail applications, notably in cases where the convict has served 50% of the sentence - Appellant had completed 3 years, 3 months, and 3 days of his term. (Paras 2, 4, 6)
(B) Bail and Suspension of Sentence - Factors for considering bail - Appellate courts must ensure that individuals do not serve their sentence in its entirety without appealing, ensuring justice in procedural matters. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for offenses related to sexual assault, receiving a 7-year sentence, and applied for bail, as his appeal had not been heard since 2020.
Findings of Court:
The Court determined the necessity to suspend the sentence under specific conditions to ensure both the appellant's rights and to maintain the integrity of the court's process.
Issues: The court addressed whether to suspend the appellant's sentence given the time elapsed since the appeal and the conditions under which bail may be granted.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on established precedents that suggest suspension of sentence may be warranted particularly when an appellant has undergone a substantial portion of their sentence.
Result: The application for suspension of sentence is allowed with specific conditions.
ORDER
CRL.M.(BAIL) 1046/2022
1. This is an application seeking suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal.
2. The appellant has been convicted u/s 376/342 IPC and has been sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default 1 month simple imprisonment. The fine has been paid in court.
3. As per the Nominal Roll dated 22.10.2022, the appellant has an unexpired portion of 3 years 3 months 3 days.
4. In `Sonadhar vs. State of Chattisgarh', [2021 SCC OnLine SC 3182] as well as `Saudan Singh vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh', [2021 SCC OnLine SC 3259], the Supreme Court has observed that bail applications for suspension of sentence may be considered once the appellant has undergone 50% of their sentence prescribed.
5. In Saudan Singh (supra) the Supreme Court held the following:
"Para 7. We may note that there may be even convicts in custody in cases other than life sentence cases and in those cases again the broad parameter of 50 per cent of the actual sentence undergone can be the basis for grant of bail."
6. I am of the opinion that the appeal in the present case is of the year 2020 and there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future. If the sentence of the appellant is not suspended, it could very well be that he would have undergone the entire sentence without his appeal having been heard leaving the remedy of filing the appeal as a mere paper formality.
7. Hence, I am of the view that the sentence of the appellant needs to be suspended subject to the following terms and conditions:
i. The appellant shall furnish a personal bond with one local surety in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent;
ii. The appellant shall provide his mobile number to the Investigating Officer (IO) concerned, which shall be kept in working condition at all times. The appellant shall not switch off, or change the same without prior intimation to the IO concerned, during the period of suspension of sentence;
iii. The appellant will furnish his permanent address to the IO and in case he changes his address, he will inform the IO concerned and this Court also;
iv. The appellant shall appear before the Court as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing;
v. The appellant shall not leave the country and if the appellant has a passport, he shall surrender the same to the Jail Superintendent;
vi. The appellant shall not communicate with, or come into contact through email, WhatsApp or message with the prosecutrix, or any member of her family;
vii. The appellant shall not be in the vicinity of the prosecutrix or any of her family members;
viii. The appellant shall not indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings in pending cases, if any.
8. The application is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
