Delhi High Court – Orders
Jafar Ali vs State Of Delhi on 16 April, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 282/2025
JAFAR ALI .....Appellant
Through: Dr. Anil Kumar Gupta and Ms.
Sheetal Mahur, Advocates.
versus
STATE OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP.
SI Jitender Singh, PS: Burari.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 16.04.2025
CRL.M.(BAIL) 516/2025
1. The Petitioner has preferred the instant appeal assailing the judgment
dated 01st February, 2025 as well as the order on sentence dated 13th
February, 2025 in SC No. 28248/2016, arising out of FIR no. 325/2012
registered at P.S. Burari, whereby he has been convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601. As per the
impugned order of sentence, the Appellant has been directed to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months, and a fine of INR 1,000/-
has been imposed on him, in default of payment of which, he has been
directed to undergo further simple imprisonment for 2 months. Additionally,
the Petitioner has also been directed to pay compensation in the sum of INR
20,000/- to the victim under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
19732.
1
“IPC”
2
“Cr.P.C.”
CRL.A. 282/2025 Page 1 of 4
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/04/2025 at 21:57:26
2. Through the present application, the Appellant seeks suspension of
sentence during the pendency of the present appeal. It is noted that in terms
of the nominal roll, as on 07th April, 2025, the Petitioner has undergone a
total period of 6 months and 20 days in custody, and has earned remission of
3 days. As an undertrial, he spent 4 months and 13 days in custody, and
post-conviction, he has undergone sentence for a period of 1 month and 25
days. The unexpired portion of his sentence is 2 years, 11 months and 7
days.
3. Counsel for the Appellant points out that while the Appellant was
originally charged with the offence under Section 307 of IPC, however, on
conclusion of the trial, he was convicted for the offence under Section 325
of IPC, which is compoundable. He further submits that the Appellant had
already paid a compensation amount of INR 40,000/- to the
victim/complainant – Mr. Akhilesh, by way of a demand draft and this fact
has also been acknowledged by the victim in his examination in chief,
recorded by the Trial Court on 30th October, 2015. Thus, in light of the
above, the Appellant seeks suspension of sentence and consequent release
on bail.
4. The Court has considered the submissions of the Appellant. The
Supreme Court in Sudhir Kumar Jain v. State of Delhi,3 observed that
Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 empowers the
Appellate Courts to suspend sentences till the pendency of appeal, in cases
where the period of sentence does not exceed 3 years. For ease of reference,
the relevant observations are reproduced as under:
“6. Keeping in view the fact that the appeals are not being disposed of
3
MANU/SC/8988/2007CRL.A. 282/2025 Page 2 of 4
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/04/2025 at 21:57:26
expeditiously by Appellate Courts, Legislature, in its wisdom, has enacted
Section 389, Code of Criminal Procedure Sub-section (3) of which
empowers the Trial Court to suspend the sentence of such convicts, who
have been convicted for a period not exceeding three years, for such
period as will afford them sufficient time to present an appeal. Section 389
also empowers the Appellate Court including the High Court to suspend
the sentence and release the convict on bail during the pendency of the
appeal in case the period of sentence does not exceed three years.”
5. Considering that the sentence awarded to the Appellant is
imprisonment for a period of 3 years and 6 months, which is marginally
above the threshold of 3 years, and the Appellant has undergone a total
period of 6 months and 20 days in custody, as well as the fact that the appeal
is unlikely to come up for hearing in the near future, this Court considers it
to be a fit case to exercise powers under Section 389 read with Section 482
of the Cr.P.C. (now Sections 430 and 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 20234, respectively).
6. However, it is pertinent to note that as per the impugned sentence
order, the Appellant is also directed to pay further compensation to the
victim to the tune of INR 20,000/-.
7. Therefore, in light of the above, the sentence of the Appellant is
suspended during the pendency of the appeal, subject to him paying the fine
imposed on him as well as depositing the compensation amount of INR
20,000/- with the Trial Court, within a period of one week from today and
further subject to him furnishing a bail bond in the sum of INR 25,000/- with
one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the concerned
Jail Superintendent/Trial Court/ Duty MM on the following conditions:
(a) The Appellant shall provide his mobile number(s) to the concerned
4
“BNSS”
CRL.A. 282/2025 Page 3 of 4
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/04/2025 at 21:57:26
Investigating Officer5, which shall be kept in a working condition at all
times and shall not switch off or change the mobile number without prior
intimation to the IO concerned during the period of suspension of sentence.
(b) The Appellant shall furnish his permanent address to the IO within
two weeks of his release and in case he changes his address, he will inform
the IO concerned and this Court;
(c) The Appellant shall appear before the Court as and when the appeal is
taken up for hearing;
(d) The Appellant shall not leave the country without the permission of
this Court;
(e) The Appellant shall not commit any offence during the period of his
release.
(f) The Appellant shall appear before the concerned IO on the first
Monday of every three months at 2:00 PM to mark his presence. However,
he shall not be kept waiting for longer than one hour for this purpose.
8. The IO is directed to intimate the victim/complainant about this order,
so that he can approach the Trial Court for the release of the compensation
amount.
9. The application is allowed in the afore-mentioned terms.
10. Copy of the order be sent to the Trial Court for necessary information.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
APRIL 16, 2025/d.negi
5
“IO”
CRL.A. 282/2025 Page 4 of 4
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/04/2025 at 21:57:27
[ad_1]
Source link