"Every Day Of Freedom Matters": Delhi High Court Modifies Condition For Suspension Of Sentence To Personal Bond For Convict Unable To Furnish Surety

Granting relief to a woman convict, the Delhi High Court recently modified a suspension of sentence condition for deposit of surety bond to deposit of a personal bond instead, on account of her being unable to furnish the surety.

Observing that every day of freedom matters, Justice Jasmeet Singh was of the view that the accused cannot be made to stay in jail for the reason that she could not furnish surety.

The woman namely Sehnaz was convicted under the offences of Section 120B of Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act in a 2013 case. She was awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and fine of Rs. 40,000 (Rs. 20,000 each), in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

As per her nominal roll, her remaining sentence as on January 2022 was approximately 2 years, out of 7 years sentence awarded. Therefore, vide order dated January 19, 2022, the High Court had suspended her sentence pending hearing of her appeal, on furnishing Personal Bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with two Surety Bonds of the like amount.

Subsequently, in March, Sehnaz again approached the Court by filing an application seeking modification of the January order on the ground that despite passing of the said order suspending her sentence during the pendency of the appeal, she could not avail the benefit on account of the fact that neither surety of Rs.25,000 could be arranged, nor any family member had come forward to do the needful.

Accordingly, the Court had directed that the condition of two surety be modified to the extent of one surety, who may not be a family member and the amount of the personal bond and surety was also reduced to Rs.15,000.

However, in the recent hearing on June 1, the counsel appearing for Sehnaz submitted that the condition of March order required further modification as she was unable to furnish surety. Therefore, it was requested that she be released on personal bond only, without any surety.

"I am of the view that once an order of suspension has been passed, the applicant must be entitled to its benefit in its true letter, spirit and intent. Every day of freedom matters and the applicant cannot be made to stay in jail for the reason that she could not furnish surety," the Court thus observed.

Accordingly, the order was further modified and the applicant was directed to be released on a personal bond of Rs. 10,000.

"The applicant, however, shall report to the nearest local police station at Ghaziabad twice a week, i.e. on Monday and Thursday," the Court added.

It was further directed that Sehnaz shall share her mobile number with the Investigating Officer and the same shall be operational at all times.

The application was accordingly disposed of.

Case Title: SEHNAZ v. STATE

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 596

Click Here To Read Order