New Delhi, June 11 -- The Supreme Court has underlined that a person loses the benefit of the presumption of innocence once convicted by a court of law, cautioning appellate courts against re-appreciating evidence and suspending life sentences unless there are compelling indications that the conviction may not ultimately survive scrutiny. A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan made the observation while setting aside Allahabad high court orders that had suspended the life sentences of three convicts in the 2017 murder of Meerut municipal councillor Aarif and his associate Shadab. "Once the accused is held guilty the presumption of innocence no longer remains," held the bench in a recent order, emphasising that this principle must guide appellate courts while considering applications for suspension of sentence and release on bail pending appeal. The ruling came on appeals filed by the complainant, Aamir, against separate high court orders granting bail to convicts Shakeeb, Shariq and Kashif. The judgment is significant for its restatement of the law governing suspension of sentence after conviction, particularly in serious offences carrying life imprisonment.The bench said that where a person convicted of murder seeks suspension of sentence pending appeal, the appellate court's inquiry is limited. The court must examine whether there exists something "gross" or "very palpable" in the conviction which makes it more than prima facie apparent that the convict has a fair chance of acquittal. The bench underscored that appellate courts should ordinarily remain "loath and circumspect" while dealing with such applications. "The appellate court should ordinarily not re-appreciate the evidence and try to find out some lacunas here or there in the evidence," it added....