No mandatory appearance at every hearing after bail on sentence suspension: Supreme Court

Strongly disapproving the approach of the appellate court, the Supreme Court held that once bail is granted after suspension of sentence, insisting on the accused’s physical presence at every hearing is unnecessary, oppressive and devoid of legal justification, particularly when appeals often remain pending for extended periods.

Describing the cancellation of bail and issuance of non-bailable warrants as “appalling and shocking”, the Bench observed that the appellate court should have explored reasonable alternatives such as appointing an amicus curia or permitting other lawful arrangements instead of resorting to coercive measures.

The apex court restored the petitioner’s bail and directed that it shall continue until the final disposal of the criminal appeal. It further ordered that a copy of the judgment be placed before the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court for circulation among the district judiciary through an appropriate circular.

The Supreme Court also directed the appellate court to decide the pending appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months