In a decisive ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized that an ongoing trial in another case cannot automatically block an accused from receiving a suspension of sentence. The verdict was handed down by a bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra, in response to a case where the accused, convicted of murder, had been denied sentence suspension by the High Court.
The crux of the case lay in a claim for equitable treatment: the accused sought the same relief as co-accused who had already been granted suspension of sentence. However, the State opposed the plea, arguing that the accused was also facing a separate, pending criminal trial.
Rejecting the State’s argument, the Court sided with the appellant, Narendra Singh, stating that a pending trial alone does not suffice to deny the benefit of sentence suspension. The Court made it clear that Singh, like any accused, remains innocent until proven guilty in the pending trial, and therefore, this should not affect his current case.
The ruling read, “Mere pendency of the other trial where the appellant is on bail cannot be regarded as sufficient for denying him suspension of sentence in this case.” With this reasoning, the Court overturned the High Court’s decision, granting suspension of sentence and release on bail, subject to conditions set by the Sessions Court.
The appeal was allowed, marking a critical interpretation of the law that reinforces the principle of presumed innocence, even when multiple legal proceedings are involved.
