Life convicts who have served over 10 years may be granted bail pending appeal unless there are extenuating circumstances for denial.

Order :

1. The appellant-applicant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 09.12.2019 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metro, in Sessions Case No.14/2015:

2. The appellant-applicant has preferred the application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentences during the pendency of the appeal and for release on bail.

3. The plea raised by learned counsel for the appellant- applicant is that the applicant has undergone a sentence of 10 years, 02 months and 22 days (as per the report furnished by learned Public Prosecutor) and there is no chance of hearing of the appeal in near future, thus, in view of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 15.09.2022 in Sonadhar v. The State of Chhattisgarh : SLP (Crl.) No.529/2021, the sentence of the applicant be suspended and he be enlarged on bail.

3.1 The custody report furnished by learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record.

4. Further submissions have been made that there are no reasons and / or extenuating circumstances for denial of bail. Submissions have also been made with reference to order dated 05.10.2021 in Saudan Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh : SLP (Crl.) No.4633/2021, wherein also observations have been made regarding grant of bail in the appeal at the High Court stage except certain exceptions and that none of the exceptions are applicable in the present case.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for suspension of sentence with the submission that as the appellant- applicant has committed heinous offence, suspension of sentence of such offender would send adverse message in the society. However, he has not denied that the applicant has already undergone a total sentence of 10 years during trial and after sentence.

6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

7. Looking to the fact that criminal appeals pertaining to year 2020 also are pending for hearing, there is no likelihood of hearing of the present appeal in near future.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh (supra) observed an exception, which could be a broad guideline, which reads as follows :-

"1. Heinous nature of crime :

(a) Prohibited categories : To ensure public peace and the well-being of the society, life convicts who are hardened criminals, repeat offenders, kidnappers, in crimes related to massacre (three or more than three murders), habitual criminals, and fall in prohibited categories as per the U.P. Jail Standing Policy- no bail should be granted. "

9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sonadhar (supra), while dealing with SMW (Crl.) No.4/2021 pertaining to ‘life convicts in jail whose appeals are pending before the High Court’ inter-alia, issued the following directions :-

“We consider appropriate to issue directions in terms of the aforesaid suggestions to the Patna High Court and on a pari materia basis to even the other High Courts. However, in order to carry out this exercise, the data would have to be compiled of such of the persons who have been in custody for more than 10 years and more than 14 years, with these persons being considered for grant of bail pending appeal, if there is no chance of hearing of the appeal in the near future, unless there are reasons for denial of bail. We can understand if any of the parties is delaying the appeal itself but short of that, we are of the view that all persons who have completed 10 years of sentence and appeal is not in proximity of hear