Ranjeet Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, Judge

This order shall disposed of the application seeking suspension of conviction passed by the learned trial Court for the offence u/s 352 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Trial No. 12-AR/7 of 2008/2011, decided on 9.9.2011. The petitioner was released on probation by giving him the benefit of Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act in lieu of sentence. It is averred in the application that the appellant-applicant has a very good prima-facie case in his favour and the appeal is likely to succeed in all probabilities and further that the appeal may take time in its disposal and it would be expedient in the interest of justice to suspend the conviction.

The contention raised by the appellant-applicant in this application does not fall within the purview of the rare cases where the suspension of sentence can be stayed. Though, Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure confers power not Only to suspend the execution of sentence and to grant bail, but also suspension of "order appealed against", which means the order of conviction, as held in Navjot Singh Sidhu Vs. State of Punjab and Another, by the apex Court. It is also held that an appellate Court can suspend order of conviction and grant stay of order of conviction, but the person seeking stay of conviction should specifically draw the attention of the appellate Court to the consequences that may arise if the conviction is not stayed. Unless the attention of the Court is drawn to the specific consequences that would follow on account of the conviction, the person convicted cannot obtain an order of stay of conviction. The Apex Court also observed that the grant of stay of conviction can be resorted to in rare cases depending upon the facts of the case. Neither such facts have been pleaded nor supported by the learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant. Therefore, there is no ground to suspend the conviction passed by the learned trial Court. The application is dismissed.