The Supreme Court clarified that once a sentence is suspended, a convicted person need not appear at every appellate hearing. Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale observed that appeals take years, making mandatory physical presence purposeless in practice.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has recently clarified that it is unnecessary to require a convicted individual to appear at every hearing of their appeal when their sentence has already been suspended.
Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale noted that appeals can take years to resolve, and demanding the presence of the convict or accused at every hearing serves no purpose.
ALSO READ: Cheque Bounce Cases: New Supreme Court Guidelines
The Court stated,
“The appeal before the Appellate Court many a times would be pending for months or years together and many a times after being posted before the Court for hearing it would be adjourned for myriad reasons namely either at the instance of the appellant – accused or the State or the complainant etc. However, in such circumstances, to call upon the accused to be present on every date of hearing before the Revisional Court or the Appellate Court would be burdensome to such accused and same is not warranted at all and it would serve no purpose,”
This observation came during the hearing of a plea by Meenakshi, who was convicted in a cheque dishonor case. The proceedings were instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, alleging dishonour of two cheques issued by the petitioner’s mother for amounts of Rs 7,00,000 and Rs 5,00,240. The dishonour led to conviction and sentencing, against which an appeal has been filed and remains pending. After her conviction, she filed an appeal in the appellate court, which suspended her sentence while her appeal was pending.
However, due to various reasons, she was unable to appear during some hearings, leading the appellate court to issue a Non-bailable warrant against her. When she challenged this decision in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the repeated adjournments prompted her to seek relief from the Supreme Court.
In November 2025, the Supreme Court condemned the non-bailable warrant’s issuance and granted her bail.
This week, the Court learned that in Haryana, it is commonplace for accused individuals to be summoned for every hearing in the appellate court, even when their sentences have been suspended. The Court emphasized that such a requirement is entirely unnecessary and determined that Meenakshi’s bail, granted in November, would remain in effect until her appeal is resolved by the appellate court.
The Court remarked,
“In the event of appeal or revision being dismissed the consequences would automatically follow and the jurisdictional magistrate would be fully empowered to secure the presence of such accused in accordance with the provisions of the Act,”
Also Read: Former Cricketer Virender Sehwag’s Brother Arrested in Rs 7 Crore Cheque Bounce Case
Furthermore, the Court instructed that this order be forwarded to the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court for distribution to all district courts.
It concluded that:
“It is also made clear that bail granted to the appellant by this Court by Order dated 27.11.2025 would be in operation till disposal of the appeal CRA No.956/ 2017 and appellant shall cooperate with the Appellate Court in disposal of the appeal expeditiously and preferably within three (3) months.”
Meenakshi was represented by Advocates Dhruv Gautam and Abhishek Tongar, while the State was represented by Haryana Additional Advocate General Lokesh Sinhal, along with Advocates Akshay Amritanshu, Sarthak Srivastava, Mayur Goyal, and Abhay Nair.
Case Title: Meenakshi v. State of Haryana & Ors.
READ ATTACHMENT:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
