Ramji Prasad
v.
Rattan Kumar Jaiswal & Another
(Supreme Court Of India)
Criminal Appeal No. 386 of 2000 (SLP (Crl.) No. 3519 of 1999) | 18-04-2000
Leave granted.
2. Appellant is the brother of one Madan Lal who was murdered on a day when his father Kanahya Lal was also murdered. First respondent was one of the accused chargesheeted by the investigating agency for the aforesaid murder. We are told that one of the six assailants is still absconding and hence the trial proceeded against the remaining five accused. Four were acquitted and first respondent was found guilty of the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is found that he used a gun to shoot the deceased. The trial Court convicted him as per the judgment dated 15-7-1999. He filed an appeal before the Allahabad High Court and at the first instance itself he was granted bail as per order dated 14-9-99 passed by a learned single Judge of the High Court. Appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid order has filed this appeal by special leave.
3. Absolutely no reason is shown by the learned single Judge for adopting this exceptional course in a case where an accused was found guilty by the trial Court under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The normal practice in such cases is not to suspend the sentence and it is only in exceptional cases that the benefit of suspension of sentence can be granted.
4. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order. Mr. K. B. Sinha, learned senior counsel arguing for the accused submitted that this case can fall within the exception for suspending the sentence. Mr. P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, on the other hand, narrated a number of broad features to support his contention that under no circumstance suspension of sentence can be granted in favour of this appellant. We refrain from considering the merits of the rival contentions, for, it is open to the first respondent to move the High Court and satisfy the High Court that his case would fall within the exception wherein there is justification for suspending the sentence.
5. With these observations the appeal is disposed of.
2. Appellant is the brother of one Madan Lal who was murdered on a day when his father Kanahya Lal was also murdered. First respondent was one of the accused chargesheeted by the investigating agency for the aforesaid murder. We are told that one of the six assailants is still absconding and hence the trial proceeded against the remaining five accused. Four were acquitted and first respondent was found guilty of the offence under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is found that he used a gun to shoot the deceased. The trial Court convicted him as per the judgment dated 15-7-1999. He filed an appeal before the Allahabad High Court and at the first instance itself he was granted bail as per order dated 14-9-99 passed by a learned single Judge of the High Court. Appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid order has filed this appeal by special leave.
3. Absolutely no reason is shown by the learned single Judge for adopting this exceptional course in a case where an accused was found guilty by the trial Court under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The normal practice in such cases is not to suspend the sentence and it is only in exceptional cases that the benefit of suspension of sentence can be granted.
4. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order. Mr. K. B. Sinha, learned senior counsel arguing for the accused submitted that this case can fall within the exception for suspending the sentence. Mr. P. K. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, on the other hand, narrated a number of broad features to support his contention that under no circumstance suspension of sentence can be granted in favour of this appellant. We refrain from considering the merits of the rival contentions, for, it is open to the first respondent to move the High Court and satisfy the High Court that his case would fall within the exception wherein there is justification for suspending the sentence.
5. With these observations the appeal is disposed of.
Advocates List
For the Appearing Parties --------------
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.T. THOMAS
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMA PAL
Eq Citation
(2002) 9 SCC 366
2000 (3) ACR 1891 (SC)
AIR 2000 SC 3564
2000 CRILJ 4992
2000 (2) ALD (CRL) 818
JT 2000 (7) SC 477
LQ/SC/2000/739
HeadNote
Criminal — Suspension of Sentence — Accused found guilty under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code — Suspension of sentence should be granted only in exceptional cases — Order of learned single Judge of Allahabad High Court granting suspension of sentence, set aside — Observations made by the SC that it is open for the accused to move the High Court and satisfy the Court that his case falls within the exception, wherein there is justification for suspending the sentence — Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 302\n(Paras 3 to 5)
Thank you for subscribing! Please check your inbox to opt-in.
Oh no, error happened! Please check the email address and/or try again.