The Supreme Court set aside the suspension of life imprisonment and the grant of bail for five individuals convicted of a brutal acid attack. The Court found the appellate order to be flawed due to non-application of mind and failure to consider relevant factors under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC). The convicted individuals have been ordered to surrender within four days or face re-arrest.

1. Case Overview: In this case, the victim of an acid attack challenged the suspension of the life imprisonment sentence and the subsequent bail granted to the convicts by the lower court.

2. Legal Framework - Section 389 Cr.PC: Section 389 of the Cr.PC governs the suspension of execution of a sentence pending appeal and the release of the appellant on bail. The Court emphasized the necessity of recording reasons for such decisions, particularly in cases involving serious offenses.

3. Judicial Precedents: The Court referred to several precedents, including Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai v. State of Gujarat and Kishori Lal v. Rupa, which emphasize the careful consideration required in granting bail for serious offenses. The Court noted that suspension of sentence should not be routine in such cases.

4. Case Analysis: The Court scrutinized the facts of the case, noting the severity of the crime, which involved an acid attack resulting in permanent disfigurement of the victim. The Court found that the lower court’s decision was primarily influenced by the convicts' offer of financial compensation and the duration of their incarceration, rather than a proper evaluation of the legal criteria.

5. Criticism of Lower Court's Order: The Supreme Court criticized the lower court for its superficial assessment and failure to consider the serious nature of the offense and other relevant factors. The Court highlighted the grave impact of acid attacks on victims and the necessity for a judicious approach in such cases.

6. Final Decision: The Supreme Court quashed the lower court's order, canceled the bail granted to the convicts, and directed them to surrender within four days. Failure to comply would result in re-arrest and commitment to custody.

7. Conclusion: The judgment underscores the importance of stringent judicial scrutiny in cases involving severe offenses, particularly when considering bail under Section 389 Cr.PC.