When a convicted appellant has served a substantial part of his sentence and the appeal shows no sign of an early hearing, suspension of sentence becomes a question of arithmetic and fairness. In Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 44 of 2025, decided on 23 September 2026, Justice Sanjay Prasad of the Jharkhand High Court released the appellant — convicted under Sections 323 and 506 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment — after he had spent more than two years and seven months in custody. What makes the order notable is its architecture: the appellant’s liberty was coupled to the victim’s rehabilitation, through a compensation deposit and a direction to the district administration.
The case
The incident dates to 2 January 2021: the victim, a girl of 16–17 years, was alone at home when the appellant — a neighbour who had earlier expressed interest in marrying her — touched her inappropriately. The FIR followed the next day. The trial court convicted him under Sections 323 and 506 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act (sexual assault) and imposed five years’ rigorous imprisonment. By the time his appeal came up for orders on suspension of sentence, he had been in custody for over two years and seven months — more than half the term.
The order and its structure
Suspension of sentence in POCSO appeals: the working principles
| Factor | Weight in practice |
|---|---|
| Proportion of sentence served | The dominant factor for fixed-term sentences; half or more served, with a distant hearing date, strongly favours suspension |
| Nature and gravity of the offence | Aggravated offences and long terms invite stricter scrutiny; Section 8 convictions with moderate terms are more amenable |
| Conduct and antecedents | Jail conduct, age, and absence of prior offences support release; supervening misconduct defeats it |
| Victim protection | Conditions barring contact with the victim and her family are standard; compensation directions increasingly accompany release |
The governing provision is Section 430 BNSS (formerly Section 389 CrPC): the appellate court may suspend execution of the sentence and release the appellant on bail, for reasons recorded in writing. In POCSO matters, courts also hear the victim’s side — a requirement reinforced by the victim’s right to be heard in bail-adjacent proceedings.
The victim-compensation dimension
The order reflects a visible trend: appellate courts knitting victim compensation into liberty orders rather than leaving it to the end of the case. The statutory machinery supports this — Section 396 BNSS obliges every State to maintain a victim compensation scheme; Rule 9 of the POCSO Rules, 2020 empowers Special Courts to direct interim compensation for relief and rehabilitation at any stage; and nothing in the appeal’s pendency suspends those powers. For practitioners on the defence side, a realistic compensation proposal can legitimately form part of a suspension application’s architecture; for those assisting victims, the case is a reminder that rehabilitation money should be pursued during the appeal, not after it.
Takeaways: track the custody certificate against the sentence; move under Section 430 BNSS with the jail conduct record; anticipate victim-protective conditions; and treat compensation not as an afterthought but as a component of the appellate bargain.
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Suspension of sentence is discretionary and depends on the record of each appeal.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the appellant convicted of?
Offences under Sections 323 and 506 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act — sexual assault on a girl aged 16–17, committed in January 2021 when she was alone at home. He was sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment and appealed.
Why was the sentence suspended?
Principally custody arithmetic: the appellant had served more than two years and seven months of a five-year term, and the appeal was not likely to be heard soon. Courts treat substantial service of sentence with a pending appeal as a strong ground for suspension under Section 430 BNSS (Section 389 CrPC).
What conditions attached to the release?
A bail bond of ₹15,000 with two sureties, a deposit of ₹50,000 under the Victim Compensation Scheme, and an undertaking against future offences. Separately, the district administration was directed to pay ₹3,00,000 to the victim for her rehabilitation.
Can victims receive compensation even while the appeal is pending?
Yes. Victim compensation under Section 396 BNSS (Section 357A CrPC) and the POCSO framework operates independently of the appeal’s outcome; interim and rehabilitative payments are routinely directed while proceedings continue.