OMPRAKASH SAHNI versus JAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC.

Citation: [2023] 5 S.C.R. 141 · Decided: 02-05-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
141
OMPRAKASH SAHNI
v.
JAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC.
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1331-1332 of 2023)
MAY 02, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND J. B. PARDIWALA, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 389 – The three
respondents were convicted for the murder of the appellant’s brother
by the Trial Court and sentenced to life imprisonment – The order
of conviction and sentence passed by Trial Court was challenged
in appeal by the respondents before the High Court – Respondents
prayed before the High Court that they be released on bail pending
the final disposal of their appeals by suspending the substantive
order of sentence of life imprisonment – High Court suspended
sentence and ordered their release on bail – On appeal, held: The
endeavour on the part of the Court should be to see as to whether
the case presented by the prosecution and accepted by the Trial
Court can be said to be a case in which, ultimately the convict stands
for fair chances of acquittal – While undertaking the exercise to
ascertain whether the convict has fair chances of acquittal, what is
to be looked into is something palpable – Something which is very
apparent or gross on the face of the record, on the basis of which,
the Court can arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that the conviction
may not be sustainable – The Appellate Court should not reappreciate
the evidence at the stage of s.389 and try to pick up few lacunas or
loopholes here or there in the case of the prosecution, it is not correct
approach – In the instant case, High Court has gone into the issues
like political rivalry, delay in lodging the FIR, some over-writings
in the First Information Report etc. – All these aspects, will have to
be looked into at the time of the final hearing of the appeals filed
by the convicts – High Court committed a serious error in suspending
the substantive order of sentence of the convicts and their release
on bail pending the final disposal of their criminal appeals – Order
of High Court set aside – Convicts ordered to surrender.
[2023] 5 S.C.R. 141
141
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
142
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 5 S.C.R.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD:1. In Vijay Kumar, it was held that in considering
the prayer for bail in a case involving a serious offence like murder
punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, the court should
consider the relevant factors like the nature of accusation made
against the accused, the manner in which the crime is alleged to
have been committed, the gravity of the offence, and the
desirability of releasing the accused on bail after they have been
convicted for committing the serious offence of murder. [Para
31][162-G]
2. The endeavour on the part of the Court, therefore, should
be to see as to whether the case presented by the prosecution
and accepted by the Trial Court can be said to be a case in which,
ultimately the convict stands for fair chances of acquittal. If the
answer to the above said question is to be in the affirmative, as a
necessary corollary, if ultimately the convict appears to be entitled
to have an acquittal at the hands of this Court, he should not be
kept behind the bars for a pretty long time till the conclusion of
the appeal, which usually take very long for decision and disposal.
However, while undertaking the exercise to ascertain whether
the convict has fair chances of acquittal, what is to be looked into
is something palpable. To put it in other words, something which
is very apparent or gross on the face of the record, on the basis
of which, the Court can arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that
the conviction may not be sustainable. The Appellate Court should
not reappreciate the evidence at the stage of Section 389 of the
CrPC and try to pick up few lacunas or loopholes here or there in
the case of the prosecution. Such would not be a correct approach.
[Para 33][163-B-D]
3. In the case on hand, what the High Court has done is
something impermissible. High Court has gone into the issues
like political rivalry, delay in lodging the FIR, some over-writings
in the First Information Report etc. All these aspects, will have
to be looked into at the time of the final hearing of the appeals
filed by the convicts. Upon cursory scanning of the evidence on
record, this court is unable to agree with the contentions coming
from the Senior Counsel for the convicts that, either there is
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
143
absolutely no case against the convicts or that the evidence
against them is so weak and feeble in n

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.