Himachal Pradesh High Court
Narender Pal Singh vs State Of H.P. on 9 May, 2025
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
Narender Pal Singh versus State of H.P.
Cr. Appeal No.196 of 2025
09.05.2025 Present: Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Aditya Chouhan, Advocate, for the
appellant.
Ms. Ranjna Patial, Advocate for the
respondent.
Cr.MP No. 1742 of 2025
By way of the present application,
indulgence of this Court has been sought to suspend
the order of sentence dated 30.04.2025, passed by
the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to
as the 'trial Court'), in Sessions Trial No.47N/7 of
2015, titled as 'State of H.P. Vs. Narender Pal Singh'.
2. Applicant has preferred the present
Criminal Appeal against the judgment of conviction,
and order of sentence dated 30.04.2025, passed by
the learned trial Court, whereby, the learned trial
Court has convicted the applicant for the commission
of offence punishable under Sections 304II and 323
read with Section 34 of the IPC, and sentenced him
as under:-
Sr. Sections Imprisonment Fine In default of
No. payment of fine,
convict shall
further undergo
1. 304-II read Rigorous `10000/- Simple
with Section imprisonment for imprisonment for
34 IPC five years 1 year.
2. 323 read Rigorous -- --
with Section imprisonment for
34 IPC two months
3. The present appeal, preferred by the
applicant, stands admitted and will take sufficient
long time, for its decision.
4. The sentence, which has been imposed
by the learned trial Court, in this case, falls within
the definition of "fixed term sentence" and according
to the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in
'Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others Vs. State
of Gujarat', reported in (1994) 4 SCC 421 and in
'Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor Vs. State of
Gujarat', reported in '2024 SCC OnLine SC 3320', the
sentence, imposed by learned trial Court, which falls
within the definition of "fixed term sentence", can be
suspended. Relevant paragraph 3 of the judgment in
Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai's case (supra) is
reproduced, as under:
"3. When a convicted person is sentenced to
fixed period of sentence and when he files
appeal under any statutory right, suspension
of sentence can be considered by the
appellate court liberally unless there are
exceptional circumstances. Of course if there
is any statutory restriction against
suspension of sentence it is a different
matter. Similarly, when the sentence is life
imprisonment the consideration for
suspension of sentence could be of a different
approach. But if for any reason the sentence
of limited duration cannot be suspended
every endeavour should be made to dispose
of the appeal on merits more so when motion
for expeditious hearing the appeal is made in
such cases. Otherwise the very valuable right
of appeal would be an exercise in futility by
efflux of time. When the appellate court finds
that due to practical reasons such appeals
cannot be disposed of expeditiously the
appellate court must bestow special concern
in the matter suspending the sentence, so as
to make the appeal right meaningful and
effective. Of course appellate courts can
impose similar conditions when bail is
granted."
5. Relevant paragraph 7 of the judgment in
Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor's case (supra), is
reproduced, as under:
"7. There is a fine distinction between a
sentence imposed by the trial court for a fixed
term and sentence life imprisonment. 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. For applying such
test, it is also not permissible for the court to
undertake the exercise of reappreciating the
evidence. The emphasis is on the word
"palpable" and the expression "apparent on
the face of the record"."
6. Consequently, application, under
consideration, is allowed and the order of sentence
dated 30.04.2025, passed by the learned trial Court,
is ordered to be suspended, during the pendency of
the appeal, and applicant, who is presently in judicial
custody, in Model Central Jail, Nahan, is ordered to
be released on bail, in this case, subject to the
following conditions:
(i) That the applicant shall furnish personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/, along with
one surety of the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court, within
a period of four weeks from today, with an
undertaking that he will surrender before the
learned trial Court to serve the remainder
substantive sentence, in case of ultimate
dismissal of the present appeal, by this
Court;
(ii) That the applicant shall deposit the fine
amount, with the learned trial Court, within a
period of four weeks from today, if not,
already deposited by the applicant.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the territory
of India without the prior permission of the
Court.
7. Application is, thus, disposed of.
8. A copy of this order be sent to the
learned trial Court, with a direction that the report
of compliance of this order be submitted to this
Court.
(Virender Singh)
Judge
May 09, 2025 (ps)
