Latest
Saturday, October 31, 2026
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Law

Six Years Seven Months in Custody, Appeal Pending Since 2022: Supreme Court Suspends Life Sentence

Published: · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court has suspended a life sentence and granted bail to a convict whose criminal appeal of 2022 is still pending before the Rajasthan High Court. Treating it as admitted that he had undergone 6 years and 7 months of incarceration, the Court said it was acting on this ground alone, set aside the High Court's order of 16.03.2026 refusing to suspend the sentence, and allowed the appeal (paras 7-10).

Six Years Seven Months in Custody, Appeal Pending Since 2022: Supreme Court Suspends Life Sentence

Judgment Intelligence

Bail Granted
S. @ D.S. v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.
Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 18467 of 2026)
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
29 October 2026
Bench
Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale
Relevant Acts & Sections
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 323, 376(3), 451, 504; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Sections 5, 6; Information Technology Act, 2000 — Sections 67A, 67B; Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Final Outcome

Appeal allowed. The impugned order is set aside, the appellant's sentence is suspended during the pendency of his appeal before the High Court and he is to be released on bail on terms to the satisfaction of the Trial Court; pending applications disposed of (paras 9-11).

Source Supreme Court of India, www.sci.gov.in — order dated 29.10.2026

Key holdings

  1. The Court took the State's figure of 6 years and 7 months as the admitted custody, without resolving the defence claim of more than 7.5 years (paras 5-6, 8).
  2. That period of incarceration, with the appeal of 2022 still pending before the High Court, was the sole ground for suspending the life sentence (paras 7-8).
  3. The Court did not examine the claimed discrepancies in the prosecution evidence or the merits of the conviction (paras 5, 8).
  4. The sentence stays suspended during the pendency of the appeal, with bail on terms to the satisfaction of the Trial Court (para 9).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

The Trial Court convicted the appellant of offences under Sections 451, 323, 504 and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and sentenced him to life imprisonment (para 3). His criminal appeal against the conviction is pending before the High Court, which dismissed his application to suspend the sentence during the appeal (para 4). Before the Supreme Court, the defence put his custody at more than 7.5 years and pointed to discrepancies in the prosecution witnesses' testimonies; the State said he had undergone 6 years and 7 months (paras 5-6).

Court's Findings

The Court did not settle which custody figure was correct. 'Be that as it may', it noted that the appeal is of the year 2022 and is still pending consideration before the High Court (para 7). It then took the State's own figure as the admitted position: the appellant has undergone incarceration for 6 years and 7 months (para 8). On this ground alone, the Court said, it was inclined to set aside the impugned order, suspend the sentence until the criminal appeal is disposed of, and grant bail (para 8). The order does not examine the claimed discrepancies in the witnesses' testimonies (para 5) and expresses no view on the merits of the conviction. It set aside the High Court's order, suspended the sentence during the pendency of the appeal, and directed the appellant's release on bail on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court (para 9). The order cites no decision and names no provision under which the sentence is suspended.

Legal Principle

A long period of incarceration actually undergone by a life convict, while his appeal remains pending before the High Court, can by itself justify suspending the sentence and granting bail until the appeal is decided. Here an admitted 6 years and 7 months in custody, with an appeal of 2022 still pending, was enough (paras 7-8).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

For a life convict whose appeal has long been pending in a High Court, this order supports an application for suspension of sentence resting on the custody actually undergone: the Court acted on that ground alone (para 8). Where the period is disputed, it can help to rely on the figure the State itself accepts, as the Court did here (paras 6, 8). It is a short order with no cited authority and no view on the merits. On suspension of sentence while criminal appeals remain pending, see also Smt. Akhtari Bi v. State of M.P.

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.

Statutory Provisions: IPC
NyayVidhan
Court Judgments · 3 min read
Decided: October 29, 2026 Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale
PDF
Join our WhatsApp Group
✕

Try: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt