The top court said the high court could have easily considered the convict's plea for suspension of sentence in the first instance by applying the correct principles of law.
The Supreme Court recently granted bail to a 70-year-old blind man in a cheating and forgery case, observing that Madhya Pradesh High Court had adopted a "casual approach" in dealing with his plea for suspension of sentence [Bherulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh].
The vacation bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed strong displeasure over the High Court's refusal to release the septuagenarian, one Bherulal, despite him completing half of the sentence.
The Court said the High Court could have easily considered the convict's plea for suspension of sentence in the first instance by applying the correct principles of law.
"We take notice of the fact that stereo type orders are passed by the High Courts without any application of mind. The High Court should have realized that the petitioner is seventy years of age and out of four years of maximum sentence imposed, has already been undergone two years’ of sentence. The petitioner is virtually blind," it said.
The Court further observed that there was nothing on record to indicate that Bherulal's release on bail pending appeal would thwart the course of justice.
"Such casual approach of the High Court has led to the filing of this Special Leave Petition before the highest court of the country. This litigation could have been easily avoided had the High Court applied the correct principles of law governing the suspension of sentence of fixed terms of imprisonment," it added.
The law is well settled that if the sentence imposed by the trial court is for a fixed term, then ordinarily the appellate court should consider the plea for suspension of sentence liberally, unless there are any exceptional circumstances to decline such relief, the Court said further.
However, it noted that High Court had not made any observation for declining the suspension of sentence in the present case.
The trial court had convicted Bherulal under various provisions of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to four years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹5,000.
Aggrieved by the conviction, he preferred an appeal before the High Court in 2023. During the pendency of appeal, he moved an application for suspension of sentence and bail.
Though more than one application for bail was moved by him, he remained unsuccessful in getting the relief from the High Court.
He then moved the Supreme Court.
Taking note of the fact that Bherulal is 70 years old, ailing and with 90 percent vision impairment, the Court ordered his release. It also took into account the fact that he has already undergone two years of sentence.
Advocates Anup Kumar, Neha Jaiswal, Shivam Kumar, Pragya Choudhary and Shruti Singh appeared for the convict.
[Read Order]
Attachment
Bherulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh.pdf