6 Nov 2023 10:43 AM GMT
There is no hard and fast rule that a convict should serve sentence for a particular period before the application to suspend the sentence can be considered, clarified the Supreme Court recently.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal was considering a special leave petition filed against an order of the Gujarat High Court refusing to suspend the sentence.
The High Court had counted only the post-conviction jail time of two convicts as the period of sentence undergone by them while considering their plea to suspend their imprisonment sentence.
Terming the High Court's approach incorrect, the Supreme Court observed :
"Before the High Court, surprisingly, a submission was made on behalf of the State that sentence undergone only post conviction should be considered ... The High Court has accepted the said submission ... Apart from the fact that the said approach is incorrect, we may note here that there is no hard and fast rule which requires an accused to undergo sentence for a particular period before his prayer for suspension of sentence is considered".
In this case, the appellants, who were convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, had undergone four years sentence. The maximum substantive sentence is rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. The appeal is of the year 2023 which is unlikely to be heard before the entire period of sentence of the appellants is over.
In this background, the Supreme Court opined that the High Court ought to have favorably considered the convicts' application, since they had no antecedents and had undergone incarceration of more than 40 percent of the maximum sentence for their offence.
The appeal was, thus, allowed. The accused were directed to be produced before the trial court within a week to be enlarged on bail.
Case Title : Vishnubhai Ganpatbhai Patel and another v. State of Gujarat.
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 955