Salman vs The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi

$~87
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Date of Decision : 14.10.2026
# CNR No.DLHC010498712026
+ CRL.A. 1032/2026
SALMAN .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Sarthak Karol, Ms. Neelakashi
Bhadauria, Ms. Laavanya Agrawal,
Advs.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Utkarsh (APP)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 32554/2026 (Exemption from filing certified and original copies
of annx.)
1. The application is disposed of with a direction to the appellant to file
certified and original copies of the annexures, before the next date of hearing.
CRL.A. 1032/2026
2. The present appeal has been filed through the Delhi High Court Legal
Services Committee (DHCLSC) assailing the judgment of conviction dated
19.08.2026 and order on sentence dated 01.09.2026 arising out of FIR No.
504/2020 registered at P.S. Amar Colony under Sections 392/397/411/34 of
the IPC passed by the Principal District & Sessions Judge (South-East), Saket
Courts, New Delhi.
3. Admit.
4. Let the trial Court record be requisitioned.
5. Let the appeal be listed at its own turn.

Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1032/2026 Page 1 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:UMANG
Signing Date:15.10.2026
21:01:01

CRL.M.(B) No.1994/2026(Seeking Suspension of Sentence)
6. The present application has been filed under Section 430 read with

Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking suspension of sentence and release of
the appellant on regular bail during the pendency of the appeal.
7. The allegation of the prosecution is that at about 08:30 P.M. on
09.12.2020, three persons robbed the complainant of his mobile phone. The
three persons were apprehended, and the robbed mobile phone was recovered
from the appellant. The learned trial Court held that the charge under Section
394 IPC was not proved, since there was no injury or MLC. The trial Court
relied upon the recovery of the phone to connect the appellant with the
robbery.
8. It is informed that, as per the Nominal Roll, the appellant has
undergone 11 months and 04 days in custody, including the period of
under-trial custody. He remained on bail during most of the trial till his
conviction. His jail conduct report is stated to be satisfactory.
9. It is noticed that the sentence is a fixed-term sentence and the appellant

has already undergone about one-fifth of it. The appeal is unlikely to be heard
before he serves a substantial part of the sentence. It is also relevant that the
appellant was on bail during the trial and did not misuse that liberty.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that arguable points arise in
the appeal, namely, the PW-1’s identification of the appellant and the
disparity between his sentence and that of the co-accused. It is further
contended that the appeal is likely to take considerable time.
11. The principles governing the suspension of a fixed term sentence
pending appeal are well settled, Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023 being in pari
materia with Section 389 of the Cr.P.C., 1973. In the landmark judgement of

Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1032/2026 Page 2 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:UMANG
Signing Date:15.10.2026
21:01:01

Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai & Ors. v. State of Gujarat , (1999) 4 SCC 421,
a case which itself arose out of a conviction under Section 392 read with
Section 397 IPC, the Supreme Court observed as under:
“ When a convicted person is sentenced to fixed period of sentence
and when he files appeal under any statutory right, suspension of
sentence can be considered by the appellate court liberally unless
there are exceptional circumstances. Of course if there is any
statutory restriction against suspension of sentence it is a different
matter. Similarly, when the sentence is life imprisonment the
consideration for suspension of sentence could be of a different
approach. But if for any reason the sentence of limited duration
cannot be suspended every endeavour should be made to dispose of
the appeal on merits more so when motion for expeditious hearing
the appeal is made in such cases. Otherwise the very valuable right
of appeal would be an exercise in futility by efflux of time. When the
appellate court finds that due to practical reasons such appeals
cannot be disposed of expeditiously the appellate court must
bestow special concern in the matter of suspending the sentence, so
as to make the appeal right meaningful and effective. Of course
appellate courts can impose similar conditions when bail is
granted.

”
12. These principles have recently been reiterated by the Supreme Court in
Aasif @ Pasha v. State of U.P. , 2025 INSC 944, wherein it has been held that
suspension of a fixed term sentence is to be considered liberally, and ought to
be declined only where there are compelling circumstances on record to
indicate that the release of the appellant would not be in the public interest.
The relevant observations are as under:
Way back in 1999, this Court in “Bhagwan Rama Shinde
Gosai and Others v. State of Gujarat” reported in (1999) 4 SCC
421 stated that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed
period of sentence and when he files an appeal under any statutory
right, suspension of sentence should be considered by the
Appellate Court liberally unless there are exceptional
circumstances.
“12.
xxx

Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1032/2026 Page 3 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:UMANG
Signing Date:15.10.2026
21:01:01

17. When the Appellate Court finds that due to practical reasons,
such appeals cannot be disposed of expeditiously, the Appellate
Court must show special concern in the matter of suspending the
sentence so as to make the appeal right, meaningful and effective. At
the same time, the appellate courts can impose similar conditions
when appeal is granted.
xxx
22. … The High Court shall keep in mind that the sentence is for a
fixed term, i.e. 4 years and it is only if there are any compelling
circumstances on record to indicate that the release of the
appellant would not be in public interest that the Court may order
accordingly.

”
13. Considering the circumstances, and the dicta laid down in the aforesaid
judgements, the substantive sentences of the appellant, including the fines, are
suspended during the pendency of the appeal. The appellant shall be released
on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with a surety of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following
conditions:
i. The appellant shall not leave the NCT of Delhi without prior
permission of this Court;
ii. The appellant shall furnish the address, where he will be residing, to the
concerned Jail Superintendent and the Investigating Officer (I.O.);
iii. The appellant shall forthwith intimate the Investigating Officer/SHO
concernedof any change in his residential address or contact details and
shall not change the same without prior intimation to the I.O.;
iv. The appellant shall furnish his mobile number to the Investigating
Officer/SHO concerned and shall keep the same switched on at all
times, with locations services enabled, and the same shall be shared
with the I.O.;
v. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly contact the

Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1032/2026 Page 4 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:UMANG
Signing Date:15.10.2026
21:01:01

complainant/victim or the family members of the victim;
vi. The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity during the

period of bail;
vii. The appellant shall report to the concerned SHOon the first Monday of
every month at 11:00 a.m. and shall be discharged by 12:00 noon after
recording his presence and completion of the necessary formalities.
14. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an
expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the pending appeal.
15. It is made clear that any breach of the aforesaid condition shall entitle
the State to seek cancellation of this order.
16. The application is disposed of in the above terms.


SACHIN DATTA, J
uk
OCTOBER 14, 2026/


Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 1032/2026 Page 5 of 5

Digitally Signed
By:UMANG
Signing Date:15.10.2026
21:01:01