VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 515
(515)
925
Conviction — suspension of
Conviction cannot be suspended where in the event
of the conviction being set aside, the damage which
is likely to be caused or caused will be compensated
by reinstatement.
A.V.V. Satyanarayana vs. State of A.P.,
2001 Cri.L.J. AP 4595
The question that arose for consideration before the High
Court of Andhra Pradesh is whether it has jurisdiction under sec.
389(1) Cr.P.C. to suspend the order of conviction.
High Court of Andhra Pradesh observed that it is clear that
under sec. 389(1) Cr.P.C., the conviction can also be suspended,
but the main criteria indicated is that the damage by virtue of the
conviction done, if cannot be undone at a future date, the court can
suspend the conviction also. In the instant case, the petitioners
appear to be Government servants involved in a case of leakage of
question papers and they are likely to be removed from service by
virtue of conviction, though the sentence has been suspended. The
appellant contended that this is an appropriate case, where
suspension of the conviction may be granted because the petitioners
services are likely to be affected.
High Court did not accept this submission for the reason
that even if the services of the petitioners are affected in any manner,
eventually in the event of the conviction and sentence being set aside,
they are bound to be reinstated into the service. In other words, the
damage which is likely to be caused or caused will certainly be
compensated by reinstatement in the event of their succeeding in
the appeal. Before seeking the relief under sec. 389 the petitioners
shall have to necessarily establish, prima facie, firstly what is the
damage caused or likely to be caused and secondly such damage