'1000s Of Appeals Pending For 20-30 Yrs': Rajasthan High Court Says Sentence Suspension Must Be Considered Where Early Hearing Is Unlikely
Rajasthan High Court has said that appellate court's discretion to grant suspension of sentence must be exercised with greater circumspection in cases where it is satisfied that the criminal appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, for the reason that if the appeal ultimately succeeds the imprisonment undergone can't be reversed.The bench of Justice Farjand Ali opined that in the...
Rajasthan High Court has said that appellate court's discretion to grant suspension of sentence must be exercised with greater circumspection in cases where it is satisfied that the criminal appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, for the reason that if the appeal ultimately succeeds the imprisonment undergone can't be reversed.
The bench of Justice Farjand Ali opined that in the High Court thousands of criminal appeals remained pending for 20-30 years, with no likelihood of early hearing. It said
"In the High Court, thousands of criminal appeals have remained pending for the last 20–30 years, including jail appeals, where even the likelihood of early hearing does not appear forthcoming. In such matters, instead of taking an irreversible risk, the court must proceed on the safer side by placing paramount importance on human dignity and personal liberty".
The applicant was convicted in an NDPS case and was sentenced to one year imprisonment, and had filed an application for suspension of sentence.
In this matter, the Court highlighted the difference between bail and suspension of sentence. It was observed that while both powers were discretionary in nature, the former was at a pre-conviction stage and the latter was at post-conviction stage when the presumption of innocence came to an end.
It was opined that while exercising the discretion to suspend a sentence, the primary consideration was whether the judgment of conviction and sentence were sustainable in the eyes of law.
“Where the sustainability of the conviction itself becomes debatable, and where the grounds raised in appeal, if adjudicated in favour of the appellant, disclose a real and substantial possibility of success, and where, prima facie, it appears that the conviction may be reversed and the appellant may be acquitted, the appellate court ought to suspend the sentence pending disposal of the appeal.”
The Court stated that the assessment had to be whether the grounds raised were merely ornamental or possesses real substance and force.
At the same time, the Court added that the appellate court was not required to record any definitive or conclusive finding, since that would amount to forming a pre-determined opinion on the merits of the appeals.
“It is sufficient if the court merely indicates that the grounds raised are prima facie appreciable, logical and legally tenable, that he are founded upon settled principles of law, and that there appears to be improper evaluation or assessment of evidence, or non-consideration / disregard of relevant statutory provisions.”
In this background, in relation to the present matter, the Court held that all the issues raised were vital and carried sufficient force, such that if these were adjudicated in the applicant's favour, there was a possibility of acquittal.
In this light, the Court allowed the application for suspension of sentence till the final disposal of the appeal.
Title: Roop Singh v State of Rajasthan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 79