Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Subodh Abhyankar, J.
Sanju @ Sanjay Verma And Two Others – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1128 of 2022
Decided On : 03-02-2022
Suspension of Jail Sentence - Criminal Appeal - The court allowed the application for suspension of jail sentence, directing the appellants to furnish a personal bond for their regular appearance before the trial court, suspending the custodial part of the sentence until the final disposal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted and sentenced by the Special Judge under the SC & ST act. The appellants sought suspension of jail sentence citing lack of proper appreciation of evidence and contradictions in witness testimony.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the application for suspension of jail sentence, considering the likelihood of the appeal taking a long time for final hearing.
Issues: Application for suspension of jail sentence pending appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the likelihood of the appeal taking a long time for final hearing and allowed the suspension of the custodial part of the sentence, emphasizing the appellants' regular appearance before the trial court.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application for suspension of jail sentence, directing the appellants to furnish a personal bond for their regular appearance before the trial court, suspending the custodial part of the sentence until the final disposal of the appeal.
JUDGMENT
Subodh abhyankar, J. - also heard on I.a. No.1684/2022, which is an application for suspension of jail sentence of all the appellants.
The appellants have been convicted by the Special Judge (under SC & ST act) Rajgarh (Biaora) vide judgment dated 19.1.2022 passed in S.T. No.345/2019 and sentenced them as under:-
Conviction | Sentence | |||
Section | act | Imprisonmen | Fine | Imprisonment in lieu of fine |
323 (03 count) r/w 34 | IPC | 01 year RI | Rs.500/-each | 6 months RI |
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and has recorded the conviction without considering serious anomalies, contradictions and omissions present in the testimony of various witnesses. It is further submitted that the statements of the independent witnesses of the case did not support the case of prosecution. It is further submitted that the appeal is likely to take a long time in its final hearing. Under these circumstances, he prays that the application for suspension of jail sentence be allowed.
The prayer for suspension of sentence is opposed by the learned counsel for the State.
Having considered the rival submissions and taking note of the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard at an early date, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, Ia No.1684/2022 is allowed and it is directed that on furnishing a personal bond by the appellants in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with a solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for their regular appearance before concerned trial Court, the execution of the custodial part of the sentence imposed against the appellants shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.
The appellants after being enlarged on bail, shall mark their presence before the concerned trial Court on 11.04.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the concerned Court in this regard.
Certified copy, as per rules.
The court has the discretion to suspend the custodial part of a sentence pending appeal, considering the likelihood of the appeal taking a long time for final hearing.
The court has the discretion to suspend a jail sentence during the pendency of a criminal appeal under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C.
The court has the discretion to suspend custodial sentence and grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the length of the sentence and the likelihood of success in the appeal.
The court has the discretion to suspend a jail sentence based on the facts and circumstances of the case, and the likelihood of the final hearing of the appeal taking a sufficient long time.
The court has the discretion to suspend the jail sentence of the appellants under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, considering the circumstances and conditions for the appellants' release on bail.
In cases of fixed-term sentences, appellate courts should liberally grant suspension of sentence and bail pending appeal, especially when there is no possibility of an expeditious hearing, to preserv....
The court may exercise discretion to suspend a substantive sentence of imprisonment pending final disposal of an appeal, taking into account the detention period already served and the expected delay....
The court has the discretion to suspend the custodial part of a sentence under Section 389 of Cr.P.C, considering factors such as the likelihood of appeal hearing and the conduct of the appellants du....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
