Judgment H. R. Panwar, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the parties on the application under Section 389 CrPC seeking suspension of conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant. 2. So far as suspension of conviction is concerned, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences under Secs. 7 & 13 (1) (d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In view of the decisions of the Honble Supreme Court in K.C. Sareen vs. CBI, Chandigarh, 2001 (6) SCC 584 ; Deputy Director of Collegiate Education (Admn.) vs. S. Nagoor Meera, 1995 (3) SCC 377 ; and State of Tamil Nadu vs. A Jagannathan, 1996 (5) SCC 329 ; I do not consider it fit to suspend the conviction. The application seeking suspension of conviction is, therefore, dismissed. 3. However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant. 4. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 389 CrPC is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 31/2003 against applicant-appellant Avinash Chand S/o Buthar Mal Katewa, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/-each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before this Court on 23.2005 and whenever ordered to do so with the incorporation in the bond that as and when he will shift his place of residence, he will intimate to this Court and his lawyer about his new place of residence.