In AASIF @ PASHA VERSUS THE STATE OF U.P. & ORS., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 783, the SC has expressed strong displeasure with an Allahabad HC order for ignoring established bail principles in a fixed-term conviction under the POCSO Act. Here’s a breakdown of the case:
- Conviction: The accused was convicted under Sections 7 & 8 of the POCSO Act, Sections 354, 354A, 323, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
- Sentence: The trial court sentenced him to 4 years of rigorous imprisonment, with sentences running concurrently.
SC Observations:
- The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order, observing that it failed to properly assess the circumstances justifying the denial of sentence suspension in a fixed-term conviction.
- The Court noted that the High Court ignored well-settled principles of law governing sentence suspension, particularly in cases of fixed-term convictions.
- The Supreme Court emphasized that when a person is sentenced to a fixed period and files an appeal, suspension of sentence should be considered liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Directions to High Court:
- The SC directed the Allahabad High Court to rehear the application for suspension of sentence and pass an appropriate order within 15 days.
- This decision highlights the importance of judicial accountability and adherence to established principles of law.