Suspension of sentence conditions in appeal should not make bail illusory, rules Raj HC

Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has held that while suspending a sentence, courts must ensure that conditions imposed do not become so onerous that they defeat a convict’s statutory right of appeal or violate the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand ruled that if a convicted appellant is genuinely unable to comply with a monetary condition imposed while suspending sentence, such a condition must be reconsidered, as continued incarceration in spite of a release order amounts to an unconstitutional deprivation of liberty.

The court reiterated that although an appellate court has the discretion to impose conditions while suspending a sentence, including conditions relating to deposit of fine, such discretion must be exercised judiciously. The court observed that a condition which an accused is incapable of fulfilling due to poverty effectively nullifies the right of appeal and renders the suspension of sentence illusory.

These principles were laid down while deciding an application filed by Rajesh Kushwah, who had been convicted under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by a sessions court in Ajmer. The High Court had earlier suspended his sentence on October 7, 2025, subject to several conditions, including deposit of a fine amount of Rs.1 lakh.

Despite the suspension of sentence, the applicant remained in custody as he was unable to deposit the fine amount due to financial hardship. He approached the High Court seeking recall of the condition, contending that his continued detention was solely on account of poverty.

The High Court noted that the applicant had already undergone nearly eight years of imprisonment and that his personal liberty was at stake despite a valid release order. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in CBI vs Ashok Sirpal, the court observed that conditions attached to suspension of sentence must not be impossible to comply with, particularly in cases involving IPC and cognate offences.

The court also took note of the fact that lawyers across the state were abstaining from work due to a call for strike, and reiterated settled law that such abstention cannot obstruct judicial functioning, especially in matters involving personal liberty.

Holding that poverty and penalty cannot override constitutional guarantees, the High Court recalled the condition requiring deposit of the fine amount of Rs.1 lakh and directed the trial court to release the applicant forthwith, subject to compliance with the remaining bail conditions.

However, the court clarified that the order was passed in the peculiar facts of the case and should not be treated as a precedent in other matters. The court also directed that a copy of the order be forwarded to the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Rajasthan for appropriate action.

Case Title
Rajesh Kushwah vs State of Rajasthan

Case Number
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (Suspension of Sentence) Application No. 2204/2024
in
S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 3151/2024

Court
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench

Bench
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand

Date of Order
January 24, 2026

Advocates
For the appellant: None present
For the respondent (State): None present