The Supreme Court noted that there are many criminal appeals pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court while it suspended the sentence of a convict in a cheating case.
The Supreme Court has put a hold on the five-year prison sentence of a convict in a cheating case. This decision was made due to the large number of criminal appeals pending in the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the low chance of a quick hearing. Justices Dipankar Datta and Sandeep Mehta made this ruling while reviewing an appeal against the High Court’s earlier decision not to suspend the sentence. The convict was found guilty under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, with a maximum penalty of five years, and has already spent eight months in jail. Advocate Nitin Saluja represented the petitioner during the hearing. The Bench noted that the significant backlog of cases in the High Court raised a “genuine concern” that the appeal might not be heard in time.
The Bench stated, “The chance of the appeal being heard soon is quite low. Therefore, there is a real worry for the appellant that his appeal could be lost due to delays.” The Court also criticized the High Court for not scheduling a hearing date when the appellant requested a suspension of his sentence for the second time, noting that the denial of relief led to an unnecessary appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Bench has put the sentence on hold but instructed the appellant to actively pursue the appeal in the High Court. It cautioned that if the appellant does not argue the appeal, the High Court may cancel the bail. The trial court’s sentence will stay suspended until the appeal is resolved, and the appellant will be released on bail, subject to any conditions set by the trial court. The Court emphasized that the comments in this order and the granting of bail do not imply any judgment on the case’s merits.
Additionally, the Court stated that the appellant must actively pursue the appeal in the High Court. If a request for a hearing is made, it will be considered fairly. If the High Court agrees to hear the appeal, the appellant must cooperate to reach a conclusion. If the High Court wishes to proceed but the appellant does not attend, it can take appropriate actions, including canceling the bail. Furthermore, if the respondent State informs the High Court that the appellant has violated any bail conditions, the High Court can cancel the bail. The appeal is allowed under these conditions.
Cause Title: Abhay Jaiswal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
