IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rajendra Kumar Verma, J.
Rajjan Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4609 of 2023
Decided On : 01-04-2023
Suspension of Sentence - Criminal Law - The court allowed the application for suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, considering the appellant's innocence and the fact that the jail sentence was already suspended by the Trial Court.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offences under Section 354 of IPC and Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act. The appellant sought suspension of sentence, claiming innocence and citing material omissions and contradictions in the prosecution witnesses' version.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the application for suspension of sentence, directing the appellant to deposit the fine amount, furnish a personal bond, and mark his presence before the trial Court on specified dates.
Issues: Application for suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the appellant's innocence, material omissions, contradictions in prosecution witnesses' version, and the fact that the jail sentence was already suspended by the Trial Court in allowing the application for suspension of sentence.
Final Decision: The application for suspension of sentence was allowed, and the execution of custodial part of the remaining sentence imposed against the appellant was suspended, subject to specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Rajendra Kumar (Verma), J. - Heard on the question of admission.
2. The appeal is admitted for final hearing.
3. Also heard on I.A No.7260/2023 which is an application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence moved on behalf of appellant.
4. The appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 02 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- and under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. The learned trial Court has erred in not appreciating the fact that there are material omissions and contradictions in the version of the prosecution witnesses. The jail sentence of the appellant has been suspended by the Trial Court till 13.04.2023 and during bail he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. Hence, counsel prayed that application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.
6. Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State on the other hand has opposed the application and prays for its rejection.
7. In due consideration of the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, o n perusal of the record and looking to the fact that the jail sentence of the appellant is already suspended, it would be appropriate to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant.
8. Accordingly, I.A No.7260/2023 filed on behalf of appellant is allowed and it is directed that subject to deposit of fine amount if already not deposited and on furnishing personal bond by appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for his regular appearance before the concerned trial Court, the execution of custodial part of the remaining sentence imposed against the appellant shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.
9. The appellant, after being enlarged on bail, shall mark his presence before the concerned trial Court on 10.07.2023 and on all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by the concerned trial Court. Let the record of the Court below be requisitioned.
10. List in due course for final hearing.
11. Certified copy, as per rules.
The court has the discretion to suspend the jail sentence of an appellant under Section 389 of Cr.P.C, subject to certain conditions.
The court has the discretion to suspend the custodial part of a sentence under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, considering various factors including the appellant's conduct, likelihood of appeal hearing, a....
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.
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 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....
The court has the discretion to suspend sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. pending the appeal, based on the entirety of facts and circumstances.
The court can suspend a sentence during the appeal process if justified by circumstances such as the duration of custody and similar cases.
The court may allow the suspension of sentences if the grounds raised by the appellant for suspension are arguable and the disposal of the appeal would consume time.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.