Suspension of sentence for fixed terms must consider statutory principles to avoid rendering appeals futile.

1. Leave granted.

2. The impugned Order is one more from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad with which we are disappointed.

3. This petition arises from the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 29/05/2025 in Criminal Appeal No.8689/2024 by which the High Court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court.

4. It appears from the materials on record that the appellant was put to trial in the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO Act), Meerut, Uttar Pradesh in Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Case No.270/2016 for the offence punishable under S.7 & S.8 respectively of the POCSO Act, S.354, S.323 and S.504 respectively of the Indian Penal Code and S.3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989.

5. At the end of the trial, the appellant stood convicted.

6. He was sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.3000/- for the offence punishable under S.354 IPC for the offence under S.7 and S.8 respectively of the POCSO, he came to be sentenced to undergo 4 years of RI with fine of Rs.4,000/- and for the offence under the SC / AT Atrocities Act, he came to be sentenced to undergo 4 years of RI with fine of Rs.5,000/-. The Trial Court ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

7. Being dissatisfied with the Judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court, the appellant went in appeal before the High Court. His Criminal Appeal No.8689/2024 is awaiting final hearing. In the said appeal, the appellant preferred an application under S.389 of the Code seeking suspension of the substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court.

8. The High Court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence observing as under: -
"21. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant / appellant, the learned A.G.A. for State - opposite party - 1, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence as well as complicity of applicant / appellant, accusation made, this court finds that the objections raised by the learned AGA in opposition to this application for suspension of sentence could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant / appellant with reference to the record at this stage, therefore, irrespective of the varied submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant / appellant in support of this application for suspension of sentence and also considering the fact that the applicant / appellant has been held to be guilty of committing the offence which is not only immoral but also heinous, therefore, this Court does not find any good or sufficient ground so as to enlarge the applicant / appellant on bail during the pendency of present appeal."

9. In such circumstances, referred to above, the appellant is here before this Court with the present petition.

10. There are two types of sentence that the Trial Court can impose depending on the nature of the offence. Some orders of sentence are for a fixed term, unlike the order of sentence of life imprisonment.

11. The case in hand is one of a fixed term of sentence. The maximum punishment that has been imposed is 4 years.

12. Way back in 1999, this Court in " Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others v. State of Gujarat " reported in (1999) 4 SCC 421 stated that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed period of sentence and when he files an appeal under any statutory right, suspension of sentence should be considered by the Appellate Court liberally unless there are exceptional circu