Under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., a sentence can be suspended during the appeal process, contingent upon the provision of a personal bond and sureties.

Headnote:
SUSPENSION - SENTENCE - The court granted the suspension of the sentence under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., allowing the applicant/appellant to remain free during the appeal process, emphasizing the importance of personal bonds and sureties while not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Fact of the Case:

The applicant/appellant, Jitendra Choudhari, sought suspension of his sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge after being convicted in a trial. He was previously on bail during the trial.
Finding of the Court:

The court considered the arguments from both the applicant/appellant's counsel and the Public Prosecutor, ultimately deciding to suspend the sentence without commenting on the case's merits.
Issues: Whether the sentence awarded to the applicant/appellant should be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to suspend the sentence was based on the provisions of Section 389 of Cr.P.C., which allows for suspension of sentence pending appeal, provided certain conditions are met.
Result: The application for suspension of sentence was allowed, with the condition that the applicant/appellant furnish a personal bond and sureties.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Kumar Songara, J. - This application for suspension of sentence has been preferred on behalf of the applicant/appellant under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence awarded by Additional Sessions Judge No. 8, Jaipur Metropolitan Second, vide its judgment dated 24.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.03/2020 (36/2019) (CIS No. 414/2019).

2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant submits that the applicant/appellant was on bail during trial and his sentence has already been granted by the learned trial court after judgment and order of conviction. Hence, sentence awarded to the applicant/appellant may be suspended during pendency of the appeal.

3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available on record.

5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant and overall facts and circumstances of the case; but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant/appellant.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that execution of the sentence awarded by the trial court to the applicant/appellant, namely Jitendra Choudhari S/o Sunil Choudhari shall remain suspended during the pendency of appeal; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (one surety shall be the resident of Jaipur Metro or Jaipur District) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 18.11.2021 thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document