JUDGMENT 1. - Instant petition has been filed by accused petitioner Ram Singh seeking stay of judgment of conviction dated 28.6.2007 in Sessions Case No. 113/2005 in which he was convicted for the offence under sections 201 & 176 IPC and sentenced to two years simple imprisonment and fine under section 201 IPC and as against section 176 IPC sentenced to one month simple imprisonment and fine. 2. On 18.7.2007 the applicant has moved a petition mentioning therein that he is a Government employee working in police department and after registration of FIR he was arrested and suspended from his service; he is facing extreme crunch & grave hardship as he is the only earning member in the family. It has also been averred that his sentence has already been suspended by this Court and now it has been given to understand that his services are likely to be terminated very soon. Petitioner-appellant also filed an affidavit on 3.9.2007 to the effect that his services have been dismissed by the Directorate. Telecommunication, Rajasthan Police, Jaipur vide order dated 20.7.2007 and he also annexed the dismissal order issued by Superintendent of Police-1st, Telecommunication, Rajasthan Police, Jaipur. 3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner-appellant as well as complainant and learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material placed during the course of arguments. 4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner-appellant inter alia contended that during the pendency of this petition order of dismissal from his service has been passed by Superintendent of Police-1st, Telecommunication, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur on 20.7.2007, therefore he will suffer irreparable injury in case execution of conviction order is not suspended. Reliance was placed on S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Stay Application No. 265/2006 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 689/2003 titled as Suresh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan decided on 7.3.2006 , Laxman Lal and another v. State of Rajasthan and another, reported in 2006(1) RLW 121 , S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Petition No. 202/2006 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 612/2002 titled as Dinesh v. State and S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No. 385/2007 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 158/2007 titled as Shiv Lal v. The State of Rajasthan . 5. Stay Petition No. 202/2006 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 612/2002 titled as Dinesh v. State and S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No. 385/2007 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 158/2007 titled as Shiv Lal v. The State of Rajasthan . 5. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel appearing for complainant opposed the petition and contended that on considering the evidence accused appellant has been convicted for the offence under sections 201 & 176 IPC and in exceptional cases such remedy can be resorted. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. It is settled position of law emerged from the various judgments of the Apex Court that where conviction is capable of execution the same may be stayed in appropriate cases on specific request being made in this regard by the convict. In the instant case accused appellant who is Government employee has been convicted only for the offence under sections 201 & 176 IPC, he was a low paid employee and it has been pointed out that his entire family is dependent upon him, there is no immediate prospects of his appeal being heard and disposed of in near future and the appeal is continuance of trial which has not yet attained finality and he has been terminated only after filing of this petition. It has been held in the case of Laxman Lal and another (supra) relying on various judgments of the Division Bench of this Court that even after termination of the services order of conviction can be stayed. In Dinesh's case (supra) learned Single Bench of this Court deemed it proper to stay the order of conviction of accused petitioner passed under section 304-B IPC keeping in view that petitioner was a Government employee and he may visit adverse consequence of termination flowing from the order of conviction. Keeping in view the entire factual and legal aspect of the matter, I consider it appropriate to entertain the prayer of the applicant for staying the judgment of conviction. 7. Consequently, this stay petition is allowed. The impugned judgment of conviction dated 28.6.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 113/2005 shall remain stayed during the pendency of this appeal.Petition allowed. *******