Suspension of sentence pending appeal; release of appellant on bail
Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with suspension of sentence pending appeal; release of appellant on bail. Pending any appeal by a convicted person, the Appellate Court may, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order that the execution of the sentence or order appealed against be suspended and, also, if he is in confinement, that he be released on bail, or on his own bond or bail bond: Provided t The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Pending any appeal by a convicted person, the Appellate Court may, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order that the execution of the sentence or order appealed against be suspended and, also, if he is in confinement, that he be released on bail, or on his own bond or bail bond:
Provided that the Appellate Court shall, before releasing on his own bond or bail bond a convicted person who is convicted of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years, shall give opportunity to the Public Prosecutor for showing cause in writing against such release:
Provided further that in cases where a convicted person is released on bail it shall be open to the Public Prosecutor to file an application for the cancellation of the bail.
(2) The power conferred by this section on an Appellate Court may be exercised also by the High Court in the case of an appeal by a convicted person to a Court subordinate thereto.
(3) Where the convicted person satisfies the Court by which he is convicted that he intends to present an appeal, the Court shall,---
(i) where such person, being on bail, is sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years; or
(ii) where the offence of which such person has been convicted is a bailable one, and he is on bail,
order that the convicted person be released on bail, unless there are special reasons for refusing bail, for such period as will afford sufficient time to present the appeal and obtain the orders of the Appellate Court under sub-section (1); and the sentence of imprisonment shall, so long as he is so released on bail, be deemed to be suspended.
(4) When the appellant is ultimately sentenced to imprisonment for a term or to imprisonment for life, the time during which he is so released shall be excluded in computing the term for which he is so sentenced.
Section 430, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 389 Suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant onbail Text carried over almost unchanged 87%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Preet Pal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-5.pdf 2020-08-14 (not same-date order-4 ROP). Arun Mishra/Indira Banerjee, Crl A 520/2020. Post-conviction suspension of sentence under CrPC 389 is not the same as pre-trial bail: after a finding of guilt there is no presumption of innocence, and in a serious offence (here 304B) the appellate court must record reasons and look at the prima facie merits. High Court bail of a life-sentence convict set aside. Map CrPC 389 and successor BNSS 430.
On this section: Successor of CrPC 389 (mapping.csv near-identical). Post-conviction suspension teaching carries to BNSS 430.
-
Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau of Investigation
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception in criminal procedure. The presumption of innocence, being a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution, places the burden on the prosecution to prove guilt. Courts must exercise their discretion in granting or refusing bail judiciously, considering all relevant factors including the nature and gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the conduct of the accused during investigation, the delay in trial, and the likelihood of the accused absconding. Investigating agencies must comply with Section 41 and 41A of the CrPC by recording reasons for arrest and for not arresting. Non-compliance with these provisions entitles the accused to bail. Courts must act as guardians of liberty and ensure that personal liberty is protected in accordance with the procedure established by law.
On this section: Suspension of sentence pending appeal; release of appellant on bail
-
Shyam Narain Pandey vs State of U. P
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an appellate court is inclined to release on bail a convicted person sentenced to death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for ten years or more, it is mandatory for the appellate court to first give an opportunity to the Public Prosecutor to file written objections against such release. Service of appeal and bail application papers does not satisfy this requirement. The appellate court must affirmatively grant a specific opportunity for written show cause, wait for the Public Prosecutor's written response (if any), and then proceed to consider the bail application. The procedure is mandatory, not discretionary, and non-compliance renders the bail order procedurally defective and liable to be set aside.
On this section: Core provision for post-conviction bail and suspension of sentence; the proviso requires mandatory written show cause opportunity to Public Prosecutor for serious offences
-
Somesh Chaurasia vs State of M. P
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person convicted of a serious offence under Section 302 IPC and released on bail during suspension of sentence is subsequently implicated in another serious offence (particularly murder) committed during the period of bail, the bail must be cancelled as the accused has misused the liberty granted to him. The High Court must apply stringent legal principles governing post-conviction bail and cannot dispose of bail cancellation applications by merely directing further investigation without considering the gravity of allegations, criminal antecedents, and material facts indicating abuse of process. The cancellation of bail is warranted when there is evidence of misuse of liberty by engaging in similar criminal activity, and the court must ensure that the rule of law is preserved and that no person, regardless of political connections, is shielded from the administration of criminal justice.
On this section: Suspension of sentence pending appeal and release on bail - the Court analyzed the procedure and conditions for granting and cancelling bail post-conviction, emphasizing that the second proviso allows cancellation when the accused misuses liberty
-
The State of Punjab vs Rakesh Kumar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act applies to all forms of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, including manufactured preparations such as tablets, syrups, and vials containing narcotic substances. Possession of such manufactured drugs in bulk quantities without valid authorization constitutes a violation of Section 8 of the NDPS Act. The NDPS Act operates as a special law in addition to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and is not barred by it. The distinction between manufactured and non-manufactured drugs does not determine whether the NDPS Act applies; rather, the applicability depends on whether the substance contains narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances and whether possession is authorized for medical or scientific purposes in accordance with the Act, rules, and authorized licenses.
On this section: Provides for suspension of sentence pending appeal. The High Court used this provision to suspend the sentences of the accused, which the Supreme Court found to be erroneously applied.
-
Dadu @ Tulsidas vs State of Maharashtra
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 32A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is unconstitutional insofar as it takes away the power of the appellate court to suspend sentences awarded to convicts under the Act, because such complete prohibition renders the substantive right of appeal illusory and violates Article 21 of the Constitution. However, Section 32A remains valid insofar as it restricts the Executive's power to suspend, remit or commute sentences under Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as this restriction is for a reasonable purpose of combating drug trafficking and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. A sentence awarded under the Act can be suspended by the appellate court only and strictly subject to the conditions spelt out in Section 37 of the Act, which requires reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
On this section: Empowers appellate courts to suspend sentences pending appeal and release appellants on bail. Section 32A was held to unconstitutionally take away this power for NDPS offences.
-
Maktool Singh vs State of Punjab
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 32A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which prohibits suspension, remission or commutation of sentences under the Act (except Section 27), has an overriding effect and applies to all courts, including the High Court, and therefore the High Court cannot suspend sentences passed on persons convicted of NDPS offences (except Section 27) at any stage, including during the pendency of appeal. The non obstante clause in Section 32A makes it clear that this prohibition operates despite any provision in the Criminal Procedure Code or any other law. Section 36B of the NDPS Act, which preserves High Court powers under Chapter XXIX of the CrPC, is subject to the phrase 'so far as may be applicable', which limits the applicability of CrPC provisions to the extent they are not interdicted by Section 32A.
On this section: The Court held that Section 389, which confers power to suspend sentences pending appeal, cannot be exercised by courts in NDPS cases (except Section 27) because Section 32A of the NDPS Act overrides this provision through its non obstante clause.
-
Malkhan Singh vs State Of M.P.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Conviction based on circumstantial evidence is valid and can sustain a murder conviction under Section 302 IPC when: (1) the chain of circumstances is complete and leaves no reasonable doubt; (2) eye-witnesses, even if close relatives of the deceased, are credible if they have no previous animosity and their testimony is consistent with other evidence; (3) delay in recording witness statements under Section 161 CrPC does not automatically render the prosecution case suspect if the delay is explained and the explanation is plausible and acceptable; (4) motive is established through credible witness testimony; (5) the nature and extent of injuries corroborate the ocular evidence; (6) weapons and blood-stained clothes recovered from the accused corroborate the prosecution case; and (7) in the absence of any extenuating circumstances prescribed by the five exceptions to Section 300 IPC, the intention and knowledge to commit murder is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Suspension of sentence; multiple hearings were listed for suspension of sentence applications, though the final judgment did not grant suspension.
-
O. Samarjit Singh @ Naresh @ Kadeng vs The National Investigation Agency
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a convict in a terrorism-related case has undergone substantial detention (more than 70% of the maximum sentence) and the appellate process is likely to be prolonged with no immediate prospect of final hearing, bail pending disposal of appeal may be granted, provided stringent conditions are imposed to ensure compliance and prevent flight or further criminal activity.
On this section: Provides the legal framework for suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending disposal of criminal appeal
-
Reena Devi vs State (govt of Nct of Delhi)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An appellate court will not interfere with an acquittal judgment when the trial court has properly appreciated the evidence and correctly applied the burden of proof standard (beyond reasonable doubt). The acquittal judgment of the trial court is upheld when the appellate court finds no perversity or misapplication of law in the trial court's reasoning.
On this section: Application for securing presence of accused - dismissed as devoid of merit
-
Md. Jeharul Ali vs The State of Assam
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An appellate court will not re-appreciate evidence to find minor lacunas for the purpose of granting bail under Section 389 CrPC unless the conviction is patently illegal or perverse.
On this section: Governs the suspension of execution of sentence pending appeal.
-
Coffee Dynamics Pvt. Ltd. - through Its Director Rahul Anil Leekha vs Government of Gujarat
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The statutory requirement of depositing a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation under Section 148 of the N.I. Act is not absolute; appellate courts have the discretion to reduce or exempt the deposit amount under exceptional circumstances of financial hardship by recording specific reasons.
On this section: Applied to suspend the execution of the sentence and payment of compensation pending the final determination of the appeal.
-
Subramani vs State Rep.by
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving conviction for serious offences like murder under Section 302 IPC, suspension of sentence pending appeal is not granted as a matter of course. The appellate court must consider the nature of the accusation, the manner in which the crime was committed, the gravity of the offence, and the desirability of releasing the accused on bail after conviction for such serious offence. The normal practice is not to suspend the sentence, and suspension is granted only in exceptional cases. Where circumstantial and electronic evidence, including forensic evidence of bloodstains on weapons and clothing, establishes the guilt of the accused despite hostile witnesses, and the crime involves a brutal murder in broad daylight, the case does not fall within exceptional circumstances warranting suspension of sentence.
On this section: Power To Suspend Sentence Pending Appeal - Basis for filing these miscellaneous petitions seeking suspension of sentence
-
O S Narayanasamy vs R Arumugam
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Appellate Court, while exercising power under Section 389 CrPC in an NI Act appeal, may adjust the quantum of interim deposit under Section 148 NI Act if compelling personal hardships such as severe medical illness are sufficiently proved.
On this section: Provision used to seek suspension of the execution of a sentence during the pendency of an appeal.
-
Shrawan Kashinath Lilake vs The State of Maharashtra
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the material on record prima facie does not establish that an accused was a member of a group acting with common intention to commit gang rape, and the evidence suggests the accused arrived at the crime scene after the initial assault, the conviction under Section 376D IPC is questionable. In such circumstances, where the accused has already undergone prolonged incarceration, suspension of sentence pending appeal is justified under Section 389 CrPC, subject to stringent bail conditions to protect the victim and ensure the accused's appearance.
On this section: Suspension of sentence pending appeal - the court exercised its discretion under this section to suspend the substantive sentence imposed by the trial court pending disposal of the criminal appeal.
-
Sri Adnan Turabi vs Sri Vijay Nair
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 389, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In criminal appellate proceedings, procedural defaults in taking steps should not permanently bar a hearing on merits if the appellant shows a willingness to proceed and has complied with interim conditions like fine deposits.
On this section: Relating to suspension of sentence pending appeal.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… (4) When the appellant is ultimately sentenced to imprisonment for a term or to imprisonment for life, the time during which he is so released shall be excluded in computing the term for which he is so sentenced. " The power of suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the CrPC (Corresponding to Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is vested in the Appellate Court dealing with an appeal against the order of conviction. On a plain reading of subsection (1), the Appellate Court has the power to suspend the execution of a sentence or order appealed against. If the appellant/accused is in …
-
… Act confers power upon the appellate Court to pass an order pending appeal to direct the appellant-accused therein to deposit the sum which shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation on an application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [ Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] seeking to suspend the sentence… … " as also that " … …normally the appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit… … " therein, however, in a given case wherein the said appellate Court is " satisfied " about such deposit of 20% being " …
-
… Act confers power upon the appellate Court to pass an order pending appeal to direct the appellant-accused therein to deposit the sum which shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation on an application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [ Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] seeking to suspend the sentence… … " as also that " … …normally the appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit… … " therein, however, in a given case wherein the said appellate Court is " satisfied " about such deposit of 20% being " …
Questions about Section 430
What have the courts held on Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Preet Pal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (14 Aug 2020) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 389, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Successor of CrPC 389 (mapping.csv near-identical). Post-conviction suspension teaching carries to BNSS 430. Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 7 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2000 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 430, section 430 BNSS, section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 430(1) and bnss 430(3). Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Preet Pal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (14 Aug 2020).
What should I read with Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward CrPC 389 (Suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant onbail), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 430, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.