Life convicts with no criminal antecedents and prolonged incarceration may be granted bail pending appeal unless compelling reasons for denial exist.

ORDER :

1. The appellants-applicants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 16.02.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No.37/2015:

Appellant - Smt. Ramkanya:

Appellant – Nanudas @ Rameshwar:

2. The appellants-applicants have preferred the applications 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 salient facts of the case, as discerned by this Hon’ble Court, reveal that a report was lodged on 11.01.2015 by the complainant regarding an incident that occurred on 10.01.2015 when the deceased Jagdish Das went with Nanu Das, but did not return back. Subsequently, the body of the deceased Jagdish Das was found on 11.01.2015.

4. Mr. J.V.S. Deora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants-appellants, submits that there are no previous criminal antecedents of the appellants.

4.1 Learned counsel further submits that though the merits of the case warrant intervention, but he is restricting his arguments to the prolonged period of incarceration endured by the appellants i.e. more than 10 years.

4.2 The only plea raised by learned counsel for the appellants- applicants is that as the appellants have already undergone the custody of more than 10 years 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 applicants be suspended and they be enlarged on bail.

4.3 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 though opposes the application for suspension of sentence with the submission that as the appellants-applicants have committed heinous offence, suspension of sentence of such offender would send adverse message in the society. However, he has shown to this Court the actual custody report and antecedent report of the applicants-appellants and submits that the actual custody of more than 10 years of both the applicants-appellants is a correct fact and both the applicants- appellants do not have any criminal antecedents. The custody report and the antecedent report are taken on record.

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 appeal is pertaining to year 2019 and is pending at the stage of hearing and that there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard 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), habit