IA ORDER

1] RULE.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent No. 1 – State.

2] This application is filed by the applicant for suspension of sentence in connection with the conviction recorded vide judgment and order dated 26-02-2026 by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Court), Surat in Sessions Case No. 820 of 2021, whereby, the applicant was convicted for the offences under 379(a)(3) of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven (07) years and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default simple rigorous for one (01) year for the offence under Section 379(a)(3) of the IPC.

3] Heard learned advocate Mr. Gajendra Baghel for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the respondent No. 1 – State.

4] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of seven years and has already undergone approximately two years and four months of incarceration. On the merits of the case, it is submitted that no Test Identification Parade was conducted during the course of investigation. Further, as per the version of the complainant and other witnesses, the incident occurred in the wee hours of the morning when it was dark, thereby rendering the identity of the applicant doubtful. Moreover, as per the complaint, the complainant has stated that a mangal sutra was also kept in the purse; however, there is no clarification in respect of the same. The learned advocate submits that the present appeal is filed within time period of appeal. Learned advocate further submits that 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 APP for the respondent No. 1 State has objected to the present application to grant suspension of sentence and has submitted that the order of sentence is just and proper and no interference is required in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and hence, present application may be rejected.

6] On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of conviction and considering the submissions of the learned advocate for the applicant, the arguments of learned advocate for the applicant deserves consideration as the applicant is sentenced for a fixed period and the sentence is for a fix period of seven (07) 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 26-02-2026 by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge Surat in Sessions Case No. 820 of 2021,, is suspended during pendency of the criminal appeal and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and on the following conditions: -

(i) shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(ii) shall not leave India without prior permission of