Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Subhash Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1013 of 2023
Decided On : 17-01-2023
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C - Suspension of Jail Sentence - The court allowed the suspension of the jail sentence for the appellant based on the consideration that the appellant was on bail during the trial, did not misuse the liberty granted, and the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take time.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for multiple offences under the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to imprisonment and fines. The appellant filed an application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for the suspension of the jail sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the arguments from both parties, decided to suspend the jail sentence for the appellant, allowing him to be released on bail upon depositing the fine amount and furnishing a personal bond and surety.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant's custodial period should be suspended based on the circumstances of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the appellant's conduct during the trial, the likelihood of the appeal taking time for final disposal, and the absence of expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter.
Final Decision: The court allowed the suspension of the jail sentence for the appellant, directing his release on bail upon fulfilling certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J. - Heard on I.A No.970/2023, which is an application filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C, for suspension of jail sentence moved on behalf of the appellant No.1 Subhash Chandra Patidar and appellant No.3 Shyam Chandra Patidar.
2. Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 420 (three years for each)(30 counts), 467 (five years for each)(30 counts), 468 (three years for each)(30 counts), 469(two years for each)(30 counts), 471 (two years for each)(30 counts) read with Section 120-B(I) of IPC and fine of Rs. 500 for each offence in each counts is passed with a default sentence of three months imprisonment on each counts of offence.
3. Counsel for appellant submits that the appellant was on bail during the trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. The final hearing of the appeal is likely to take time. In view of the aforesaid, his remaining custodial period be suspended.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State has opposed the prayer. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the appellant was on bail during the trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him and the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take time, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter I.A.No.970/2023 is allowed and jail sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended.
5. It is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not deposited he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) alongwith a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court firstly on 24.04.2023 and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
6. List alongwith CRA No. 11900/2022, CRA No.11836/2022, CRA 11965/2022, CRA No. 12535/2022 for analogous hearing.
The court has the discretion to suspend the jail sentence and grant bail to appellants pending appeal, considering the nature of the sentence and the likelihood of success in the appeal.
The court may consider the short nature of the sentence, the delay in the appeal process, and the potential for success in the appeal as grounds for suspending the jail sentence and granting bail.
Under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., a sentence can be suspended during the appeal process, contingent upon the provision of a personal bond and sureties.
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 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 the remaining jail sentence and grant bail, considering the conduct of the appellants during the trial and the trial Court's decision to suspend the sentence.
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(1) of Cr.P.C, considering various factors including the appellant's conduct, likelihood of appeal hearing, a....
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
