Appeal against the High court’s order dismissed the suspension of sentence
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 29-5-2025 in Criminal Appeal No.8689/2024 by which the High Court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court.
Trial and sentencing
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 Sections 7 & 8 respectively of the POCSO Act, Sections 354, 354Kha, 323 and 504 respectively of the Indian Penal Code and Section 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.
Sentence
6. He was sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.3000/- for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC for the offence under Sections 7 and 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.
Hon’ble High Court’s order dismissing suspension of sentence
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.”
Analysis
9. In such circumstances, referred to above, the appellant is here before this Court with the present petition.
Sentence types explained
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.
Suspension of sentence should be considered by the appellate court
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 circumstances.
14. Similarly, when the sentence is life imprisonment, the consideration for suspension of sentence could be of a different approach.
15. But if for any reason the sentence of a limited duration cannot be suspended, every endeavour should be made to dispose of the appeal on merits, more so when a motion for expeditious hearing of the appeal is made in such cases.
17. When the Appellate Court finds that due to practical reasons, such appeals cannot be disposed of expeditiously, the Appellate Court must show special concern in the matter of suspending the sentence so as to make the appeal right, meaningful and effective. At the same time, the appellate courts can impose similar conditions when appeal is granted.
19. It is unfortunate that the High Court while passing the impugned order failed to take into consideration the well-settled principles of law governing the plea of suspension of sentence on fixed term is concerned. What the High Court did was to reiterate the entire case of the prosecution and the oral evidence which has come on record.
20. That is not the correct approach.
Order set aside and remand the matter to High Court for fresh consideration
22. In such circumstances, referred to above, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration of the plea of the appellant – herein for suspension of the substantive order of sentence keeping in mind the principles of law as explained by us aforesaid. The High Court shall keep in mind that the sentence is for a fixed term, i.e. 4 years and it is only if there are any compelling circumstances on record to indicate that the release of the appellant would not be in public interest that the Court may order accordingly.
Hon’ble Supreme Court advice to the Hon’ble High Court
23. We are once again constrained to observe that such errors creep in at the level of High Court and only because the well settled principles of law on the subject are not applied correctly. It is very important to first look into the subject-matter. Thereafter the court should look into the issue involved. In the last the court should look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply the correct principles of law.
24. With the aforesaid, the Appeal stands disposed of.
Party
Aasif @ Pasha … Appellant(s) vs. The State of U.P. & Ors … Respondent(s) – Criminal Appeal No. 3409/2025 (@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 11361/2025) and has the citation 2025 INSC 944 – August 6, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan.
