In Jaspal Singh v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, CRL.A. 129/2025 (order of 1 September 2026), Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha of the High Court of Delhi dealt with an appeal against a conviction under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012 recorded in October 2022 — in circumstances where the trial court had not yet pronounced sentence, because post-conviction medical evaluation indicated the appellant suffered from dementia with cerebral atrophy. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file afresh at the appropriate stage: as the Court noted, it is only when the sentence is awarded that the judgment becomes complete and can be appealed against. The short order sits at the meeting point of three practice areas — POCSO trials, the law on post-conviction mental illness, and the mechanics of criminal appeals.
The unusual posture
The appellant was convicted on 14 October 2022 for an offence under Section 10 of the POCSO Act — aggravated sexual assault — committed in July 2013. Sentence, however, was never pronounced: post-conviction medical evaluation found dementia with behavioural symptoms and cerebral atrophy, and the question of the appellant's capacity moved to the foreground. Against that background, an appeal was filed challenging the conviction itself, contending among other things that the appellant suffered from mental illness at the time of the offence.
Why the appeal could not proceed
"It is only when the sentence is awarded the judgment becomes complete and can be appealed against."
The logic is structural. A criminal appeal under the appellate chapter lies against a judgment of conviction — and the judgment, as an appealable instrument, comprises both the finding of guilt and the sentence. An appellate court asked to examine a conviction with sentencing still open would be reviewing half an adjudication, and any view it expressed would intrude on the trial court's pending sentencing function. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, with the appellant's right fully preserved to appeal once sentencing concludes.
Three threads running through the case
Practical guidance for similar situations
The takeaway
The order is brief, but the rule it applies matters across criminal practice: conviction and sentence together make the appealable judgment. Families of convicted persons often press for an immediate challenge the day a conviction is recorded; where sentencing is deferred — for medical evaluation, for probation reports, or otherwise — the appellate clock and the appellate remedy both wait for the judgment to become complete.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a conviction be appealed before the sentence is pronounced?
Ordinarily no. An appeal against conviction lies against the judgment, and a judgment of conviction is complete only when sentence is awarded. Until then the appellate court has no complete judgment to examine — which is why the Delhi High Court permitted withdrawal with liberty to appeal after sentencing.
What happens when a convicted person is found mentally ill before sentencing?
The criminal procedure code contains a dedicated chapter on accused persons of unsound mind — Sections 328-339 CrPC, now Sections 367-378 BNSS — and courts have to address capacity questions that arise at any stage, including between conviction and sentence. Medical boards are constituted, and sentencing awaits the enquiry's outcome.
Was the insanity defence available at trial relevant here?
The defence under Section 84 IPC — unsoundness of mind at the time of the offence — is distinct from post-conviction mental illness. The first negates criminal liability and is decided at trial; the second concerns capacity during proceedings and humane administration of sentence. The two operate on different dates and different tests.
Does withdrawing an appeal prejudice a later appeal?
Not where withdrawal is with liberty, as here. Once sentence is pronounced and the judgment is complete, a fresh appeal lies within limitation computed from the complete judgment, and the earlier withdrawal — made because the appeal was premature — is no bar.