Section 430 of BNSS

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan held that bail under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) can’t be granted unless there is prima facie material indicating a fair chance of acquittal. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan and Another (2025). 

What was the Background of Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan and Another (2025) Case ? 

• On June 13, 2023, a 14-year-old girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by the accused. The victim testified that while she had gone to the field to defecate at 4 PM, the accused approached her from behind with a gun, closed her mouth, and forcibly took her to a nearby house where he committed rape. 
• The victim returned home and informed her family. Her father lodged an FIR, and she underwent a medical examination. The victim's statement was recorded under Section 164 CrPC where she maintained her allegations. 
• The accused has 11 criminal cases against him - 5 acquittals and 6 pending cases involving assault, burglary, robbery, and arms violations. 
• The trial court convicted him under Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 376(3) of IPC, sentencing him to 20 years rigorous imprisonment plus Rs. 50,000 fine. After serving 1 year 3 months, the Rajasthan High Court suspended his sentence and granted bail, prompting the victim's father to appeal to the Supreme Court.

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court observed that the High Court failed to examine whether there was anything palpable on record indicating the accused had fair chances of acquittal when considering suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC. 
• The Court noted that once convicted, the presumption of innocence is erased, and courts must look for something apparent or gross on record to justify suspension of sentence, not minor lacunae in prosecution's case. 
• The Supreme Court observed that the High Court ignored relevant factors including the accused's criminal antecedents when suspending the sentence, making the decision unjustified. 
• The Court noted that the High Court's reasoning was flawed - medical evidence stating no conclusive opinion could be given did not negate the victim's testimony, and the prosecution had explained the non-availability of forensic reports. 
• The Supreme Court observed that the High Court's conjecture about the victim going outside for toilet despite washrooms being available was untenable reasoning. 
• The Court observed that in serious offences under POCSO Act, courts must consider the nature of accusation, gravity of offence, and desirability of releasing convicted persons on bail, which the High Court failed to do. 

What is Section 430 of BNSS/Section 389 of CrPC? 

• About: 
  • Section 430 of BNSS empowers appellate courts to suspend the execution of sentences and release convicted persons on bail while their appeals are pending. 
  • The appellate court may suspend the sentence and release the convict on bail or personal bond for reasons to be recorded in writing. 
  • For convicts sentenced to death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of ten years or more, the court must provide opportunity to the Public Prosecutor to show cause in writing against such release. 
  • The Public Prosecutor has the right to file an application for cancellation of bail even after it is granted. 
  • High Courts can exercise this power in cases of appeals to subordinate courts. 
  • For sentences up to three years or bailable offences, the convicting court itself may grant bail pending appeal unless special reasons exist for refusal. 
  • The time spent on bail is excluded from the total sentence period if the convict is ultimately sentenced to imprisonment. 
• To Suspend Sentence, High Court Should Assess If Convict Has Fair Chance of Acquittal: 
  • Courts must examine whether there is anything palpable on record indicating the accused has a fair chance of overturning the conviction. 
  • The assessment should focus on apparent or gross defects in the prosecution case that are visible on the face of the record. 
  • Courts should not reappreciate evidence or search for minor lacunae in the prosecution case at the suspension stage. 
  • The evaluation must be prima facie in nature, determining if the conviction may not be sustainable based on obvious flaws. 
  • Once conviction occurs, the presumption of innocence is erased, making the standard for bail more stringent than pre-conviction bail. 
  • Courts must consider the nature of accusation, gravity of offence, manner of commission of crime, and criminal antecedents of the convict. 
  • The assessment should determine if the convict ultimately stands fair chances of acquittal, justifying release pending lengthy appeal proceedings. 
  • In serious offences like those under POCSO Act, courts must be particularly cautious about releasing convicted persons on bail. 
  • The reasoning for suspension must meet the legal parameters and cannot be based on conjectural grounds or superficial analysis of evidence.