The court may stay a conviction in exceptional circumstances, especially when it affects a person's livelihood and family welfare.

1. Order on Criminal Misc. Application No. 09/2021.
Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for appellant and Ms. Manju Thakur, learned AGA - Ist appearing on behalf of State.

2. The above noted application has been filed on behalf of the appellant praying that the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant vide judgment and order dated 11.01.2019 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Amroha, in S.T. No. 216 of 2014, State Vs. Punjab Singh and others, under S.498 A, 304 B, 120B and S.3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. - Amroha, Dehat, District - Amroha, may be stayed during the pendency of above noted criminal appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the above noted application was listed on 04.03.2025 and 06.03.2025 but the learned counsel for informant, Sri Mithlesh Kumar Ojha, did not turned up. He was informed about the order passed on 06.03.2025 in writing on 06.03.2025 itself, but he is not present when the case is called out. He is not receiving the phone calls being made by the learned counsel for appellant on mobile number of counsel for informant.

4. An affidavit of compliance of clerk of the learned counsel for appellant has been filed today containing averments of above facts, which is taken on record.

5. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the appellant has already been directed to be enlarged on bail vide order dated 09.02.2021 by this Court which is quoted hereinbelow: -

"Shri Ashutosh Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Amit Sinha, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
In this application, the appellant seeks suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
This appeal arises out of judgement and order dated 11.01.2019 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C. - II), Amroha in Sessions Trial No. 216 of 2014 convicting the accused appellant under S.498A, S.304B of IPC and S.4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentencing him under S.498A of IPC to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5000/-, under S.304B of IPC to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment and under S.4 of Dowry Prohibition Act to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default thereof, to undergo three months additional imprisonment with a direction that all the sentences shall run concurrently.
This application is being disposed of by this order.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the maximum sentence, which has been awarded to the appellant is of ten years whereas the appellant has already remained in jail for about seven years and three months. He submits that if the remission period is included, the appellant has already undergone the full sentence. It has been argued that even otherwise, offence under S.304B of IPC is not made out because basic ingredients of the said section are completely missing. Lastly, it has been argued that if the appellant is not released on bail, very purpose of filing this application would be frustrated.
On the other hand, learned State counsel though opposes the bail application but admits that the appellant is in jail since last more than seven years.
We have heard the parties.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the fact that the appellant is in jail since last more that seven years and the maximum sentence, which has been awarded to him is of ten years, without further commenting on the merits of the case, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail.
Let appellant Panjab Singh convicted and sentenced in Sessions Trial No. 216 of 2014 arising out of Crime No. 758 of 2013 be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to th