The court may suspend a convict's sentence post-conviction based on custody duration and evidence merits, despite diminished presumption of innocence.

ORDER :

This is the second attempt by the convict-applicant, namely, Sukhvinder Singh @ Dhona to seek suspension of sentence awarded to him in Sessions Case No.16 of 2016.

2. The first Suspension of Sentence Application moved by the convict-applicant was rejected by an order dated 16^th October 2019.

3. In Sessions Case No.16 of 2016, the present convict- applicant has been awarded simple imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- under section 326/34 of Indian Penal Code , simple imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs.20,000/- under section 307/34 of Indian Penal Code and life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000/- under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Anil Kumar and causing grievance injuries to his wife Manju.

4. In the trial, the prosecution produced eighteen witnesses and laid in evidence several documents to support the charge under sections 460, 323/34, 324/34, 326/34, 307/24, 302/34, 397/34, 411 of the Indian Penal Code framed against Ramandeep @ Ramna @ Beparwah, Sukhvinder Singh @ Dhona and Rahul.

5. Ms. Kinjal Purohit, the learned counsel for the present convict-applicant refers to the evidence of P.W.-1 Pradeep Kumar and P.W.-3 Banwari Lal to submit that these witnesses are not eyewitness to the occurrence and conviction of the accused persons relying on their testimony seems to be prima facie unsustainable in law.

6. Mr. C.S. Ojha, the learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this Suspension of Sentence Application on the ground that after the judgment of conviction is rendered, the presumption of innocence shall dilute and there is no other intervening circumstance for the present convict-applicant to move this Suspension of Sentence application.

7. However, having regard to the custody of more than eight years undergone by the present convict-applicant and having considered the testimony of P.W.-1 and P.W.-3, we are inclined to allow D.B. Criminal Misc 2^nd Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.1227 of 2024, therefore, it is ordered that the substantive sentence awarded to the convict-applicant, namely, Sukhvinder Singh @ Dhona shall remain suspended during pendency of the D.B. Criminal Appeal No.125 of 2019 and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 24^th March 2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:

“1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s) they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court."

8. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the convict-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the convict- applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not been taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of the cases in the trial Court. In case the said convict-applicant does not appear before the trial Court, learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.