AASIF @ PASHA versus THE STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 8 S.C.R. 682 · Decided: 06-08-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.B. PARDIWALA, R MAHADEVAN · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 8 S.C.R. 682 : 2025 INSC 944
Aasif @ Pasha 
v. 
The State of U.P. & Ors. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 3409 of 2025)
06 August 2025
[J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High 
Court by which it declined to suspend the substantive order of 
sentence passed by the trial court against the appellant.
Headnotes†
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.389 – Suspension of 
sentence pending appeal – Appellant convicted under the 
various provisions under the IPC, POCSO and SC/ST Atrocities 
Act and maximum punishment of four years imposed – Appeal 
against conviction pending before the High Court – Meanwhile, 
the appellant filed an application u/s.389 seeking suspension 
of the substantive order of sentence – High Court declined 
to suspend the substantive order of sentence – Correctness:
Held: Instant case is one of a fixed term of sentence – High Court 
while passing the impugned order failed to take into consideration 
the well-settled principles of law governing the plea of suspension 
of sentence on fixed term – High Court should have been mindful 
of the fact that the appeal is of the year 2024 – Appeal of 2024 is 
not likely to be taken up in near future – Ultimately, if four years 
are to elapse in jail the same would render the appeal infructuous 
and that would be travesty of justice – Impugned order set-aside – 
Matter remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration of the 
plea of the appellant for suspension of the substantive order of 
sentence keeping in mind the principles of law – Penal Code, 
1860 – ss.354, 354B, 323, 504 – Protection of Children from 
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – ss.7, 8 – Scheduled Castes and 
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.3(1)(10). 
[Paras 11, 19-22]
Judicial deprecation – Incorrect approach by High Court – 
Matter pertaining to suspension of sentence – High Court 
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 
683
Aasif @ Pasha v. The State of U.P. & Ors.
unfortunately while passing the impugned order failed to take 
into consideration the well-settled principles of law governing 
the plea of suspension of sentence on fixed term – High 
Court reiterated the entire case of the prosecution and the 
oral evidence, which is not the correct approach – This Court 
constrained to observe that such errors creep in at the level 
of High Court only because the well settled principles of law 
on the subject not applied correctly – Very important to first 
look into the subject-matter and thereafter the court should 
look into the issue involved and in the last the court should 
look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply 
the correct principles of law. [Paras 19, 20, 23]
Case Law Cited
Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others v. State of Gujarat 
[1999] 3 SCR 545 : (1999) 4 SCC 421; Omprakash Sahni v. Jai 
Shankar Chaudhary and Anr. [2023] 5 SCR 141 : (2023) 6 SCC 
123 – referred to.
List of Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Penal Code, 1860; Protection 
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; Scheduled Castes 
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
List of Keywords
Suspension of sentence; Fixed term of sentence; Expeditious 
hearing of appeals; Travesty of justice; Render appeal infructuous; 
Suspend the substantive order of sentence; Incorrect approach 
by the High Court.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
3409 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.05.2025 of the High Court 
of Judicature at Allahabad in CRLA No. 8689 of 2024
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Mohd. Fuzail Khan, Ms. Shisba Chawla, Anisul Haque.
684
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
1.	
Leave granted.
2.	
The impugned Order is one more from the High Court of Judicature 
at Allahabad with which we are disappointed.
3.	
This petition arises from the order passed by the High Court 
of Judicature at Allahabad dated 29-5-2025 in Criminal Appeal 
No.8689/2024 by which the High Court declined to suspend the 
substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court.
4.	
It appears from the materials on record that the appellant was 
put to trial in the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Special 
Judge(POCSO Act), Meerut, Uttar Pradesh in Protection of Children 
from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Case No.270/2016 for the offence 
punishable under Sections 7 & 8 respectively of the POCSO Act, 
Sections 354, 3
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.