Amar Singh Bodh @ A.S. Bodh vs . Cbi on 12 February, 2026

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Amar Singh Bodh @ A.S. Bodh vs . Cbi on 12 February, 2026

Amar Singh Bodh @ A.S. Bodh Vs. CBI

.

Cr. Appeal(C-SB) No. 35 of 2026

12.02.2026 Present: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate (through V.C.), for
the respondent-CBI.

of
Cr. Appeal(C-SB) No. 35 of 2026
rt Notice. Mr. Janesh Mahajan, learned counsel,

appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-CBI.

2. Admit.

3. Call for the records.

Cr.MP No.526 of 2026

4. By way of the present application, indulgence of

this Court has been sought to suspend the order of conviction

and sentence dated 05.12.2025/15.01.2026 passed by the Court

of learned Special Judge, (C.B.I.), Shimla, District Shimla, H.P.

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Corruption Trial

No.24-S/7 of 2020, titled as ‘C.B.I. versus Amar Singh Bodh &

Ors.’.

5. Applicant has preferred the accompanying Criminal

Appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 05.12.2025, and

order of sentence dated 15.01.2026, passed by the learned trial

Court, whereby, the learned trial Court has convicted the

applicant for the commission of offence punishable under Section

120-B read with Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Section

::: Downloaded on – 12/02/2026 20:34:52 :::CIS
13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act,

.

in the following manner:

Sr. Offences Sentenced In default
No. imposed

1. Sections 120-B read Rigorous Simple
with Sections 419, 420, imprisonment for imprisonment for
467, 468, 471 of IPC three years and to four months.

and Section 13(1) (d) fine of Rs.25,000/-

                                         of
               read    with    Section
               13(2) of Prevention of
               Corruption Act
          2.   Sections Section 13(1)    Rigorous            Simple
               (d) read with Section
                 rt                      imprisonment for imprisonment             for
               13(2) of Prevention of    three years and to four months.
               Corruption Act            fine of Rs.25,000/-

6. The accompanying appeal, preferred by the

applicant, will take sufficient time, for its decision.

7. The sentence, which has been imposed by the

learned trial Court, in this case, falls within the definition of “fixed

term sentence” and according to the decisions of Hon’ble

Supreme Court in ‘Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others

Vs. State of Gujarat‘, reported in (1994) 4 SCC 421 and in

‘Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor Vs. State of Gujarat‘,

reported in ‘2024 SCC OnLine SC 3320’, the sentence,

imposed by learned trial Court, which falls within the definition of

“fixed term sentence”, can be suspended. Relevant paragraph 3

of the judgment in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai‘s case

(supra) is reproduced, as under:-

“3. When a convicted person is sentenced to
fixed period of sentence and when he files
appeal under any statutory right, suspension
of sentence can be considered by the
appellate court liberally unless there are
exceptional circumstances. Of course if there
is any statutory restriction against suspension

::: Downloaded on – 12/02/2026 20:34:52 :::CIS
of sentence it is a different matter. Similarly,
when the sentence is life imprisonment the

.

consideration for suspension of sentence could

be of a different approach. But if for any
reason the sentence of limited duration cannot
be suspended every endeavour should be

made to dispose of the appeal on merits more
so when motion for expeditious hearing the
appeal is made in such cases. Otherwise the
very valuable right of appeal would be an

of
exercise in futility by efflux of time. When the
appellate court finds that due to practical
reasons such appeals cannot be disposed of
rt expeditiously the appellate court must bestow
special concern in the matter suspending the
sentence, so as to make the appeal right

meaningful and effective. Of course appellate
courts can impose similar conditions when bail
is granted.”

8. Relevant paragraph 7 of the judgment in

Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor‘s case (supra), is

reproduced, as under:-

“7. There is a fine distinction between a
sentence imposed by the trial court for a fixed
term and sentence life imprisonment. If a

sentence is for a fixed term, ordinarily, the
appellate court may exercise its discretion to
suspend the operation of the same liberally
unless there are any exceptional
circumstances emerging from the record to
decline. However, when it is a case of life
imprisonment, the only legal test which the
Court should apply is to ascertain whether
there is anything palpable or apparent on the
face of the record on the basis of which the
court can come to the conclusion that the
conviction is not sustainable in law and that
the convict has very fair chances of
succeeding in his appeal. For applying such
test, it is also not permissible for the court to
undertake the exercise of reappreciating the
evidence. The emphasis is on the word
“palpable” and the expression “apparent on
the face of the record”.

::: Downloaded on – 12/02/2026 20:34:52 :::CIS

9. In view of the law laid down by Hon’ble Apex

.

Court, as referred to above, the sentence imposed by the learned

trial Court, which falls within the definition of ‘fixed term

sentence’, is liable to be suspended.

10. Consequently, the application, under consideration

of
is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence dated

05.12.2025/15.01.2026, passed by the learned trial Court, is
rt
ordered to be suspended, during the pendency of the appeal,

subject to the following conditions:

(i) That the applicant shall furnish personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, along with
one surety of the like amount, to the

satisfaction of the learned trial Court, within a
period of four weeks from today, with an
undertaking that he will surrender before the

learned trial Court to serve the remainder
substantive sentence, in case of ultimate

dismissal of the present appeal, by this Court;

(ii) That the applicant shall deposit the fine
amount, with the learned trial Court, within a

period of eight weeks from today, if not,
already deposited by the applicant.

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the territory
of India without the prior permission of the
Court.

11. Application is, thus, disposed of.

12. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial

Court, with a direction that the report of compliance of this order

be submitted to this Court.

( Romesh Verma )
th
12 February, 2026 Vacation Judge
(Kiran)

::: Downloaded on – 12/02/2026 20:34:52 :::CIS