The Supreme Court slammed Madhya Pradesh High Court for not granting bail to a 70-year-old blind man in a cheating and forgery case. While granting bail, the apex court observed that the High Court had adopted a casual approach in dealing with the plea for suspension of sentence.

The vacation bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed strong displeasure over the High Court's refusal to release the septuagenarian, Bherulal, despite him completing half of the sentence. The top court remarked that the High Court could have easily considered the convict's plea for suspension of sentence in the first instance by applying the correct principles of law.

The bench added that they took notice of the fact that stereotype orders are passed by the High Courts without any application of mind. It said that the High Court should have realized that the petitioner is seventy years of age and out of four years of maximum sentence imposed, has already undergone two years of sentence, and is virtually blind.

Furthermore, the court also observed that there was nothing on record to indicate that Bherulal's release on bail pending appeal would thwart the course of justice. The Supreme Court remarked that such a casual approach of the High Court has led to the filing of this Special Leave Petition before the highest court of the country.

It added that the aforesaid litigation could have been easily avoided had the High Court applied the correct principles of law governing the suspension of sentences of fixed terms of imprisonment.

It underlined that the law is well settled that if the sentence imposed by the trial court is for a fixed term, then ordinarily the appellate court should consider the plea for suspension of sentence liberally, unless there are any exceptional circumstances to decline such relief. The Supreme Court further noted that the High Court had not made any observation for declining the suspension of sentence in the present case.

Notably, the trial court had convicted Bherulal under various provisions of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to four years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 5,000.

Disappointed by the conviction, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the High Court in 2023. During the pendency of appeal, he moved an application for suspension of sentence and bail.

Though more than one application for bail was moved by him, he remained unsuccessful in getting the relief from the High Court. Subsequently, he moved the Supreme Court.

Considering the fact that Bherulal is 70 years old, ailing and with 90 percent vision impairment, the Court ordered his release. It further took into cognisance the fact that he has already undergone two years of sentence.