Prioritise criminal appeals against conviction of aged accused on bail: SC

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said the old age of an accused and a long lapse of time from the commission of an offence can always be a ground to give priority to appeals against the conviction of those on bail.

Taking note of the huge pendency of criminal appeals against conviction and acquittal in high courts, the apex court said a right balance has to be struck by

taking up for hearing some of the old criminal appeals against conviction, where the accused are on bail.

"Therefore, it is desirable that certain categories of appeals against conviction, where the accused are on bail, should be given priority," a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih said.

It said considering the pendency of very old criminal appeals, priority is usually given to hearing appeals where the accused are in jail.

The bench noted that the appeals against conviction, where the accused are on bail, take a back seat.

"The old age of the accused and the long lapse of time from the commission of the offence can always be a ground available to give some priority to the appeals against the conviction of the accused on bail," it said.

The bench said if appeals against conviction, where accused are on bail and especially where a life term has been imposed, are heard after a decade or more from their filing and are dismissed, the question of sending the accused back to jail after a long period arises.

"In all the major high courts in our country, there is a huge pendency of criminal appeals against conviction and acquittal," the bench said in the post script of its March 20 judgment.

The verdict came on an appeal filed by the state of Madhya Pradesh challenging an August 2017 verdict of the high court.

The high court had set aside the conviction of some people for murder and convicted them under the second part of section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Section 304 of the IPC deals with the punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

The apex court said the high court had noted that the incident was of 1989 and one of the respondents was nearly 80 years old, while four others were above the age of 70.

The high court had let them off with the sentence already undergone.

According to the prosecution, the accused had assaulted six people over the allegation of cutting the tail of a buffalo and one of them had later died.

The state's counsel had argued in the apex court that the accused were let off with the undergone sentence of only 76 days.

The bench noted that the trial court had convicted the accused in April 1994 and the appeal against the conviction remained pending for 21 years.

While dismissing the state's appeal, the bench said the medical evidence created a serious doubt as to whether the injuries allegedly inflicted by the accused caused the death that occurred 15 days after the incident.