Life Sentence Can Be Suspended Only If It's Apparent That Conviction Isn't Sustainable: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a life convict can be granted the benefit of suspension of sentence only if prima facie it appears that the conviction is unsustainable and the convict has a high chance of succeeding in appeal against the conviction. The Court said that the benefit of suspension of sentence cannot be granted to the convict if there is nothing palpable to conclude that the conviction was unsustainable in law.

The Bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that the Court can exercise its discretion to release a convict on bail while deciding a plea for a suspension of a fixed term sentence but such a discretion cannot be exercised while deciding a plea for a suspension of life imprisonment sentence. The Court clarified that there existed a fine distinction between a sentence imposed by the trial court for a fixed term and a sentence of life imprisonment. A stringent test ought to be applied by the courts while deciding a plea for suspension of a life imprisonment sentence.

“If a sentence is for a fixed term, ordinarily, the appellate court may exercise its discretion to suspend the operation of the same liberally unless there are any exceptional circumstances emerging from the record to decline. However, when it is a case of life imprisonment, the only legal test which the Court should apply is to ascertain whether there is anything palpable or apparent on the face of the record on the basis of which the court can come to the conclusion that the conviction is not sustainable in law and that the convict has very fair chances of succeeding in his appeal.”, the Court observed.

The Court said that for taking a palpable view about the conviction being unsustainable in law, the court need not be required to re-appreciate the evidence.

In the instant case, the High Court while declining to suspend the substantive order of sentence of life imprisonment has discussed the prima facie case established against the appellant before the trial court.

Applying the abovementioned test, the Court was not inclined to interfere with the decision of the High Court because there was nothing palpable to conclude that the conviction was unsustainable in law and that the convict had a very fair chance of succeeding in his appeal against the conviction.

However, based on the submissions made by the Sr. Adv. Mr. Rauf Rahim for Petitioner that there exist mitigating circumstances such as the petitioner has to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law and her three minor children and considering the fact that an appeal is of the year 2022 which would take some time to be finally decided, the court issued notice to the respondent/State to hear the State as regards the plea for bail considering the mitigating circumstances pointed out by the Petitioner's counsel.

Mr. Rauf Rahim, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ali Asghar Rahim, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR appeared for the Petitioner.

Related - 'Fixed Term Sentences Be Suspended Ordinarily' : Supreme Court Grants Bail To 70-Year-Old Disabled Man; Chides HC For Casual Approach

Case Title: BHUPATJI SARTAJJI JABRAJI THAKOR VERSUS THE STATE OF GUJARAT, Diary No.27298/2024

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 438

Click here to read/download the order