Narain Singh vs State of Haryana

K.S. Kumaran, J.

PetitionerBalwant Singh along with his father Narain Singh and his mother Shanta, faced trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, in Sessions Case No. 92 of 1994 under Sections 304B, 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and was accordingly convicted under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years. No separate conviction under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was recorded, on the ground that it was a lesser offence. PetitionerBalwant Singh and the other accused have preferred the criminal appeal against the said conviction and sentence which has been admitted. Balwant Singh has moved this miscellaneous application for suspending the sentence passed against him and for releasing him on bail. He had also prayed for the said relief at the time of filing the appeal. But the same was declined on 2.5.1997. The petitioner has now filed this application mainly on the ground that he has suffered more than three years of imprisonment and that the appeal is likely to take a long time for its disposal.

This application is opposed by the counsel for the State. Counsel for both sides have been heard.

The petitionerBalwant Singh has been convicted under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years. According to the petitioner, he was arrested on 28.7.1994 and has been in Jail continuously for more than three years, and that he has also earned remissions. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing for another 3/4 years and if the petitioner is allowed to remain in Jail, he would have by then served the sentence, if the remissions earned by him are taken into consideration.

The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon a judgment of this Court in Dalipa Ram v. State of Punjab, Cr.M. 14218 of 1997 in Crl. Appeal No. 638SB of 1995 and the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Kashmira Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1997 Supreme Court 2147 in support of his contention in this behalf.

He also contends that the petitioner has not done anything to decline him the relief prayed for.

It is not disputed that the petitioner has by now undergone more than three years. The period already undergone comes to about three years and three months. The learned counsel for the petitioner also claims that he has been given remissions also. It is not contended that the petitioner has done anything to disentitle him to the relief of bail. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing in the near future, in view of the pendency of other old appeals. Even at a moderate estimate it will take 2/3 years before the appeal is taken up for hearing. In these circumstances, taking into consideration all the facts mentioned above, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted the relief of bail.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment passed against the petitioner/appellantBalwant Singh is ordered to be suspended and he is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing sufficient surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.