Supreme Court: No automatic stay of conviction under Section 389 CrPC merely because appeal is admitted

The Legal Issue The Supreme Court addressed the question of whether the mere admission of a criminal appeal by an appellate court automatically results in a stay of the conviction under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). This issue frequently arises in practice, where parties often assume that once an appeal is admitted, the conviction itself is put on hold without a specific order.

Court's Reasoning The Supreme Court clarified that the admission of an appeal does not, by itself, operate as a stay of conviction. The Court emphasized that Section 389 CrPC requires a specific application for suspension of sentence or stay of conviction, which must be considered and decided by the appellate court on its own merits. The Court held that a reasoned order is necessary for granting or refusing such a stay. The rationale behind this is that a conviction carries legal consequences that are distinct from the sentence, and a stay of conviction impacts these consequences, requiring careful judicial consideration beyond the mere admission of an appeal.

What Follows Appellate courts are directed to ensure that specific applications for stay of conviction are filed and adjudicated upon separately, even after an appeal has been admitted. Parties seeking a stay of conviction must file a distinct application under Section 389 CrPC, and the court must pass a speaking order addressing the grounds for and against the stay. Counsel must confirm whether the CrPC or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) applies, as new proceedings follow BNSS s.531(2)(a).