NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 7: The Delhi High Court today suspended the sentence of the former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao and former Union Minister Buta Singh in the JMM MPs' bribery case. Justice RS Sodhi also extended the bail that had been granted to them till disposal of their appeal.Appearing for Rao, counsel RK Anand told Justice RS Sodhi that that the case should be disposed off early as it was a short matter.The CBI counsel AK Dutt argued against the suspension of sentence by quoting a 1996 Supreme Court judgement. According to him, the order of conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act clearly said that ``the moral conduct of the convicts has to be taken into consideration'' due to their implication on public morality. Justice Sodhi was however not convinced and said, ``We are just suspending the sentence and not the conviction. What is the justification that I must incarcerate this person when there is a good possibility that he is innocent? And how does it harm public morality? ''While suspending the sentence, the judge asked the parties counsels to mention the matter before the end of December so that the hearing of the appeal could begin. Anand, counsel for Rao, said it is a short matter and should be disposed off early.Rao along with Buta Singh had been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 2 lakh each by special judge Ajit Bharihoke on October 13. They had been convicted for conspiring to bribe the MPs to secure their vote for defeating the no-confidence motion against the Rao government in July 1993.Anand in the appeal, argued that the trial court had ``erred in relying upon the statement of the approver Shailender Mahato''. He said that according to the Supreme Court judgement which granted immunity to members of parliament, Mahato could not have been ``challaned, convicted, sentenced by a criminal court, there was no question of his becoming an approver in this case''.Buta's counsel, Satish Tatem has argued that the prosecution had not been able to bring in ``any incriminating evidence'' against the appellant in the trial court. It says that the entire conviction is based on ``uncorroborated testimony'' of the approver Shailender Mahato, who is ``most unworthy of any reliance''. Citing instances of places where he admits to telling lies, the appeal calls for discarding his evidence altogether.
