Recently, the Supreme Court declared that there is no rigid requirement mandating an accused individual to complete a specific duration of their sentence before their request for a suspension of sentence can be reviewed.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal also expressed their astonishment over the Gujarat High Court accepting a contention by the state government that only the period undergone post conviction can be considered for such a purpose.

The Supreme Court allowed an appeal filed by Vishnubhai Ganpatbhai Patel and another individual challenging the High Court's decision dated June 20, 2023. The Supreme Court ordered the trial court to grant them bail within one week while their appeal is pending. The appellants had been convicted for offenses under Section 304 Part I, along with Sections 114, 506(2), and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

The maximum possible sentence for these offenses was ten years of rigorous imprisonment. The appellants had already served approximately four years of their sentence. The bench noted that given the year of the appeal, 2023, it was unlikely that their appeal would be heard before they completed their entire sentence.

Therefore, the High Court should have considered their request for a suspension of sentence more favorably, especially since the appellants had no prior criminal history and had already served more than 40 percent of their sentence. The bench also commented on the approach of the High Court in handling the suspension of sentence application.

The Supreme Court, however, clarified that there is no strict requirement for an accused to serve a specific duration of their sentence before their plea for suspension of sentence can be considered. As a result, the court directed that the appellants be presented before the trial court within a week, where they would be granted bail.

Case Title - Vishnubhai Ganpatbhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat