The Supreme Court recently made it clear that requiring a convict to be present during every hearing of their appeal, when their sentence has already been suspended, is entirely unwarranted. [Meenakshi v. State of Haryana & Ors]
A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale observed that appeals often take years to be disposed of and that calling upon the convict/accused to be present every time their appeal is listed would serve no purpose.
"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," the Court said.
The Court made the observation while hearing a plea moved by one Meenakshi who was convicted by a trial court in a cheque dishonour case. Challenging her conviction, she moved the appellate court, which suspended her sentence for the duration of her appeal. For various reasons, she was unable to appear before the appellate court on some days when her appeal was heard, which prompted the appellate court to issue a non-bailable warrant against her. She challenged the same before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, but due to repeated adjournments before the High Court, she moved the Supreme Court for relief.
In November 2025, the Supreme Court deprecated the issuance of the non-bailable warrant and granted her bail.
This week, the top court was informed that in the State of Haryana, it is a common practice for the accused to be called for every hearing before the appellate court, even if their sentence has been suspended.
The Court made it clear that such a requirement is entirely unwarranted and directed that the bail granted to the appellant in November continue until her appeal is disposed of by the appellate court.
"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," the Court said.
It also directed for this order be sent to the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court so that it can be sent to all district courts.
Meenakshi was represented by Advocates Dhruv Gautam and Abhishek Tongar.
The State was represented by Haryana Additional Advocate General Lokesh Sinhal, along with Advocates Akshay Amritanshu, Sarthak Srivastava, Mayur Goyal and Abhay Nair.
[Read Order]