Every convict who appeals asks the same first question: can the sentence be suspended while the appeal is heard? On 24 September 2026, in Kausar Imam Hashmi v. State of Bihar, Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 243 of 2026, a Division Bench of the Patna High Court comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sunil Dutta Mishra answered it in the negative for a 76-year-old man serving a life sentence for orchestrating a deadly armed assault three decades ago. The order maps the limits of age and infirmity as grounds for bail pending appeal in life-sentence cases.
A 1994 crime, a 2026 appeal
The prosecution’s case went back to August 1994: a confrontation at a village pond in which a group of twenty-five to thirty armed men descended on villagers grazing cattle. Gunfire followed; several persons were injured and one man, Ram Kripal Chaudhary, died. The appellant was convicted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302 and 109 of the IPC, with Section 27 of the Arms Act, on the footing that he had instigated the assault — the injured witnesses consistently identified him as the person who ordered the attackers on, after which the shooting began.
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life, he appealed to the High Court and sought suspension of sentence and bail, placing his advanced age — seventy-six — and health concerns at the front of the plea.
Why suspension was refused
The Division Bench applied the settled discipline for life-sentence appeals: at the suspension stage, the court does not re-weigh the evidence; it asks only whether the conviction is prima facie unsustainable. Three features controlled the outcome:
The order does not decide the appeal. Contradictions, investigative lapses and the reliability of a three-decade-old record all remain open for the final hearing. Suspension and merits move on separate tracks — a point convicts’ families often find counterintuitive.
Age, health and the limits of sympathy
Appellate courts are not indifferent to a septuagenarian in custody: medical boards can be directed, treatment secured, and in genuinely incapacitating illness suspension has been granted. But the jurisprudence draws a line between hardship that custody causes and hardship that merely accompanies it. Advanced age at the time of hearing — particularly where the crime itself was committed decades earlier and the trial’s length is not attributable to the prosecution alone — does not convert a refusable plea into a grantable one. Counsel advancing such applications should therefore lead with the evidentiary infirmities of the conviction and deploy age and health as supporting, not primary, grounds.
The practical sequence after refusal
Where suspension fails in a life-sentence appeal, the productive course is to seek expedition: paper books completed, lower court records requisitioned, and the appeal listed for final hearing. A renewed suspension application on genuinely changed circumstances — a documented medical crisis, or substantial further custody with no hearing in sight — stands on better footing than a repetition of the first plea. The one course that never assists is inaction; appellate dockets reward the appellant who pushes the appeal itself.
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice or a solicitation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the test for suspension of sentence in a life imprisonment case?
The appellate court takes a prima facie view of the conviction’s sustainability without conducting a mini-appeal. Where the conviction rests on apparently credible evidence — here, injured eyewitnesses consistently naming the appellant — suspension is refused, and the appeal is heard on its own timetable.
Does old age entitle a convict to bail pending appeal?
Age and health are relevant humanitarian factors, and courts do weigh them, particularly for convicts requiring treatment unavailable in custody. But they are not trumps. Where the evidence prima facie supports a conviction for a grave offence, courts have consistently held that age alone does not justify suspension.
What role did the appellant allegedly play in the crime?
He was convicted not of firing a weapon but of instigation — injured witnesses deposed that he ordered the assailants to attack, after which the firing began, resulting in one death and multiple injuries. Instigators face the same substantive liability as principal assailants under the abetment and unlawful assembly provisions.
What options remain after suspension is refused?
The appellant can press for early final hearing of the appeal, renew the suspension plea on materially changed circumstances such as serious medical deterioration, and seek interim measures like treatment directions. A refusal of suspension is not a finding on the appeal’s merits.