JUDGMENT

ANISH DAYAL, J.

1. By these applications, the appellants have sought suspension of the order on conviction dated 26thAugust, 2021 convicting the appellants till the final disposal of the appeals by this Court. These appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 26thAugust, 2021 passed by the learned Special Judge PC Act CBI-03, Rouse Avenue Courts convicting the appellants under provisions under Sections 420/471IPCr/w Section 468 IPC and under Section 13 (1)(d)r/w Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). An incident dated 26thJune, 2006 wherein it was alleged that the accused conspired amongst themselves to defraud the New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC)in a matter pertaining to execution an award of electrical works and for which purpose they awarded the work and released the payments to the contractor without ensuring that the related work was executed.

2. The subsequent order on sentence dated 14thSeptember 2021 awarded a sentence of one-year rigorous imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC with fine of Rs. 20,000/-(2 months SI in default of payment of fine), 3 years RI for offences punishable under 420/468/471 IPC, and fine of Rs. 40,000/-, (6 months SI in default of payment of fine), and 3 years RI for offence punishable under Section 13 (2)r/w 13 (1)(d) PC Act with fine of Rs. 40,000 (6 months SI in default of payment of fine) for all three appellants. These sentences were to run concurrently.

3. Since applications under Section 389 (3) Cr.P.C. had been moved by the appellants, this sentence was suspended by the learned Trial Court for a period of 60 days to enable them to file a statutory appeal. By order dated 9th October, 2021, this Court suspended the sentence of the appellants during the pendency of the appeal subject to conditions as mandated in the said order. The appellants, pursuant to the suspension of sentence and pending the final adjudication of the appeals, have preferred these applications for stay of conviction on the ground that the Chairman Disciplinary Authority, NDMC, issued a show cause notice dated 23rd November, 2022 under Rule 8 of the Central Civil Services (Pension)Rules 2021r/w Rule 19 (i) of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 r/w regulation 5 (2) (a)of NDMC(Conditions of Service of Municipal Officer) Regulations, 2016 asking the appellants to show cause as to why on the basis of the conviction, the penalty of withdrawal of pension in full, permanently be not imposed. The appellants filed a short reply to the said notice for seeking appropriate orders and clarification from this Court.

4. The appellants have already deposited the fine of Rs. 1 Lakh with the learned Trial Court and the appeals of the appellants have been admitted by this Court by virtue of order dated 28thOctober, 2021. The appellants submit that their withdrawal of pension is an extreme circumstance and if the order of conviction is not stayed/suspended, the pension being the only source of livelihood of the appellants will be permanently withdrawn and will cause suffering in the life of the appellants who are senior citizens and are suffering from multiple ailments. Contending that these are exceptional cases where this Court, to prevent abuse of process of law and in the interest of justice, could exercise its powers and stay the conviction till the disposal of the appeal.

5. The appellants have appended their medical documents in support of their asserting extreme circumstances and also submitted that the pension amount for each of them are in the range of Rs. 50- 60,000 per month. In support of their submissions, the appellants have relied upon the following decisions:

Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang, (1995) 2 SCC 513; Ravikant S. Patil v. Sarvabhouma S. Bagali, (2007) 1 SCC 673; Navjot Singh Sidhu v. State of Punjab & Anr., (2007) 2 SCC 574 ; Lalsai Khunte v. Nirmal Sinha, (2007) 9 SCC 330.

6. Relying upon these decisions, the learned counsels for the appellants contended that the orders on convi