Special circumstances unrelated to loss of employment are necessary to allow suspension of conviction.

1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 as also learned Public Prosecutor.

2. This criminal misc. petition has been preferred on behalf of the accused-petitioner with the prayer to quash and set-aside the order dated 15.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bandikui, District Dausa, whereby the application for suspending the conviction for the offence under Section 498-A IPC was rejected on the ground that such order can be passed only in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which that Court does not possess. Prayer has also been made to stay the judgment of conviction for the aforesaid offence dated 20.11.2017 passed by the learned trial court till disposal of the Appeal No.77/2017.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the petitioner is serving on the post of Subedar Major in Indian Army since 25.02.1991 and his retirement is due on 31.07.2018. An FIR was lodged against him on false facts for the offence under Section 498A IPC after 24 years of marriage. Learned trial court convicted the accused-petitioner for the aforesaid offence vide judgment dated 20.11.2017. Accused-petitioner preferred an appeal against that judgment, which is pending before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Bandikui. An application moved by the accused-petitioner for stay of the conviction was rejected vide order dated 15.12.2017 by learned appellate court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that retirement of petitioner is due just after eight months and on account of the conviction for the offence under Section 498A IPC, he will be terminated from the service and resultantly, he will also be deprived of the retiral benefits i.e. Pension, Gratuity and other facilities. This will be the consequence which is unrelated to the subject matter of the criminal appeal. He would be deprived of the mere subsistence in the evening of his life by stoppage of pensionary benefits. Counsel submits that these are the hardships which cannot be undone, if the petitioner succeeds in appeal and his conviction is set-aside at a later point of time. Counsel prays that taking note of such exceptional circumstances, the petition may kindly be allowed.

5. To support his contentions, counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following judgments :-

(I)- Jagdish Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2013 SCC OnLine Raj 450.

(II)- Navjot Singh Sidhu Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2007) 2 SCC 574.

(III)- Rama Narang Vs. Ramesh Narang & Ors., reported in (1995) 2 SCC 513.

(IV)- Subhash Kholiya Vs. State of Rajasthan – S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No.1682/2017 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.317/2017 – decided on 01.06.2017.

(V)- Sunder Lal Vs. State, reported in 2008(2) Cri. L.R. 1493.

(VI)- Shivlal Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2007(3) RCC 1039.

(VII)- Bhagwan Singh Vs. State, reported in 2009 WLC (Raj.) UC 575.

(VIII)- Suresh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2006(3) R.Cr.D. 302 (Raj.).

(IX)- Maqsood Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2007(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 801.

(X)- Harish Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2008(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 422.

(XI)- Shaitan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2006(1) RCC 179.

(XII)- Murarilal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in 2009(2) WLC (Raj.) UC 345.

(XIII)- Kanhaiya Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2001(3) WLC (Raj.) 411.

(XIV)- Laxman Lal & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., reported in 2006(1) RLW 121.

(XV)- K.C. Sareen Vs. CBI, Chandigarh, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 584.

(XVI)- State of Punjab Vs. Deepak Mattu, reported in AIR 2008 SC 35.

(XVII)- Sheo Parsan Dubey Vs. State of Bihar – Criminal Appeal No.1218/2008 – decided on 08.09.2010.

(XVIII)- Pawan Goyal Vs. State of Rajasthan – S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.4638/2013) – decided on 14.12.2013.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor have vehemently