Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Mohammad Arif vs State Of U.P on 8 April, 2026
SLP(Crl.) No.3018/2026
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.7 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3018/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-01-2026
in CRLA No. 6360/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad]
MOHAMMAD ARIF Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P Respondent(s)
(IA No. 53777/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 53778/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 08-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Mohd. Fuzail Khan, AOR
Ms. Shisba Chawla, Adv.
Mr. Anisul Haque, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR
Mr. Aniket Tiwari, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. The petitioner was held guilty by the Trial Court for the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
1
CHANDRESH
Date: 2026.04.09
17:20:28 IST
Reason:
SLP(Crl.) No.3018/2026
offence punishable under Sections 323, 326A and 498A of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”), respectively and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short,
“the Act, 1961”).
2. Being dissatisfied with the judgment and order of
conviction and sentence of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment,
The petitioner went before the High Court by way of Criminal
Appeal No. 6360 of 2023. The Criminal Appeal preferred by the
petitioner has been admitted and is awaiting for final hearing.
In the said Criminal Appeal the petitioner preferred an
application seeking suspension of the substantive order of
sentence of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and released on
bail pending the final disposal of the criminal appeal.
3. The High Court declined to suspend the substantive order
of sentence. In such circumstances, the petitioner is here
before us with the present petition.
4. By our last order dated 26th February, 2026, we had called
for the necessary information whether at the relevant point of
time any dying declaration of the victims/injured was recorded
by the Executive Magistrate or not. We had also clarified that
even if there is any statement which may not be construed as a
dying declaration as the victim survived, it would still be a
2
SLP(Crl.) No.3018/2026
statement relevant under Section 155 of the Evidence Act, 1872
being the former statement of the injured.
5. Today, we looked into the statement of the victim in
writing. Having looked into the statement of the victim in
writing, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion in
favour of the petitioner insofar as his plea for suspension of
the substantive order of sentence is concerned.
6. The appeal is of the year 2023.
7. Since, the sentence is for a fixed term it will be in
fitness of things, if the High Court takes up the Criminal
Appeal preferred by the petitioner for final hearing.
8. In any view of the matter, if the appeal is not heard in
next one year, it shall be open for the petitioner to once
again renew his prayer for suspension of the sentence and
release him on bail.
9. With the aforesaid, the Special Leave Petition stands
disposed of.
10. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(CHANDRESH) (POOJA SHARMA)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
3