IA ORDER

1] RULE.

Learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. R.C.Kodekar appears and waives service of notice of respondent No. 1 – CBI and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondent No. 2 – State.

2] This application is filed by the applicant for suspension of sentence in connection with the conviction recorded vide judgment and order dated 23-03-2026 by the learned Special Judge, I/c. CBI Court No. 6, City Civil & Sessions Court, (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Court), Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No. 04 of 2023, whereby, the applicant was convicted for the offences under Sections 120(B), 420 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five (05) years and fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for one (01) year for the offence under Sections 120(B), 420 and 471 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for five (05) years and fine of Rs.05,00,000 /- and in default simple imprisonment for one (01) year for the offence under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3] Heard learned advocate Mr. Arsh Shaikh appearing online for the applicant and learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. R.C.Kodekar for respondent No. 1 – CBI and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja for respondent No. 2 – State.

4] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that after the applicant was convicted and sentenced by the learned Trial Court, the applicant has been sent in judicial custody and is in incarceration since then. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that huge amount of fine of Rs.10,00,000/- has been imposed upon the applicant by the learned Trial Court and the applicant is not in a position to deposit the said amount of fine but is ready and willing to deposit 25% of the total fine amount before his release and the another 25% of the fine amount will be deposited within a period of three weeks. Learned advocate further submits that the present appeal is filed within the time period and the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and hearing of the same would take some long time and hence, no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period with hardened criminals. The applicant has a good case on merits and hence, the order of the sentence may be suspended and the applicant may be released on regular bail on appropriate terms and condition.

5] Learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr.R.C.Kodekar for respondent No. 1 – CBI and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja for respondent No. 2 – State have jointly objected to the present application to grant suspension of sentence and have submitted that the order of sentence is just and proper and no interference is required in the order passed by the learned Special Judge, however, in view of the quantum of sentence, necessary order may be passed.

6] On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of conviction, as the applicant is sentenced for a fixed period of five (05) years and the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, the present application for suspension of sentence can be considered, in view of the decision rendered in case of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (1999) 4 SCC 421, wherein, it has been held that when the sentence is for a fixed period, the appellate Court finds that due to practical reasons such appeal cannot be disposed of expeditiously the appellate Court must bestow special concern in the matters of suspending the sentence. And without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the arguments of the learned advocate for the applicant, requires consideration and accordingly, is allowed. The order of execution of sentence in the order dated 23-03-2026 by t