Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Delhi Division Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav suspended the life sentence imposed on Istekar Ali, a beggar in connection with a 2021 murder case. Convicted under Section 302 IPC, Ali had already spent over four years in custody. The Court noted that the prosecution’s case rested solely on circumstantial evidence and the statement of a single witness. Observing both the duration of incarceration and the unlikelihood of the appeal being heard soon, the Bench directed his release on bail during pendency of the appeal, subject to bond and surety conditions.

The case concerned an appeal filed by Istekar Ali against his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for a murder that occurred in July 2021. The trial court, by judgment dated 28.04.2025, convicted him of the offence, and on 03.05.2025 sentenced him to life imprisonment with a fine of ₹15,000, with an additional six months’ rigorous imprisonment in default of payment.

Also Read: Supreme Court | Death Penalty in 2014 Child Rape-Murder Case Set Aside | Accused Acquitted as Circumstantial and Forensic Evidence Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt

The prosecution’s case was that on 16.07.2021, police received information of a male body found under Rajokri flyover. The deceased, aged about 45–50 years, bore injury marks and was initially unidentified. During investigation, a vendor, Mohd. Isha (PW-1), identified the body as that of a beggar and informed police that the appellant, also a beggar, had been seen quarrelling with the deceased a day earlier. The danda allegedly used to assault the deceased was recovered on the instance of PW-1. On this evidence, the appellant was arrested, charge-sheeted, and later convicted.

In the appeal, the appellant applied under Sections 430 and 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking suspension of sentence. He submitted that he had undergone over four years of incarceration and argued that the prosecution case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence.

The Division Bench recorded the context of the prosecution evidence: “The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The only witness, i.e. PW-1, who found the Appellant herein quarrelling with the deceased a day before the incident is a Shikanji Rehdi Vendor.”

The Court further observed the appellant’s period in custody and the delay in hearing of the appeal. It stated: “Considering the facts of the case and the material before us, the period spent in incarceration and in view of the fact that there is no possibility of the present Appeal being heard in the near future, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of the Appellant during the pendency of the present Appeal.”

Also Read: Delhi High Court | Partition Suit by Granddaughter Rejected | No Right in Grandparent’s Property During Parent’s Lifetime Under Section 8 HSA

The Bench thus acknowledged both the evidentiary limitations and the practical difficulty of prolonged incarceration pending appeal while deciding the application for suspension of sentence.

The Court ordered: “This Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of the Appellant during the pendency of the present Appeal, subject to the Appellant furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Jail Superintendent.”

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner/Appellant: Mr. Akshai Malik, Advocate; Mr. Khawar Saleem, Advocate (DHCLSC)
For the Respondent/State: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for the State

Case Title: Istekar Ali @ Sanu v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Case Number: Crl.A. 1048/2025
Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad, Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav