JUDGEMENT 1. I.A. No. 1585 of 2010, wherein a prayer has been made for staying the conviction and sentence as passed against the appellant vide the impugned judgment of conviction whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 325 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo S.I. for two years and a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo S.I.for one month. 2. During hearing learned counsel for the appellant does not press the prayer for staying the conviction hence the prayer for staying the conviction is dismissed as not pressed. 3. However learned counsel prays for staying the sentence passed against the appellant. It is submitted that the appellant is holding the office of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj, Sheetalpur in Manjhi Block, District-Saran. It is further submitted that the occurrence of assault is said to have taken place in the night of 27.9.2009 when a quarrel had taken place on the question of demanding the price of some sweets purchased from the shop of the informant and in the occurrence the victim injured Ajay Mahto is said to have received injury in the manner that one of his teeth was broken. It is submitted that the informant and one another victim Raju Mahto who had received injury have filed compromise petition before the trial court but the victim injured Ajay Mahto had not filed any compromise and the trial had proceeded. 4. Learned counsel submitted that the occurrence is said to have taken place in course of the village dispute and it does not involve any moral turpitude. 5. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant has already been allowed bail vide this Courts order dated 10.6.2010 and the realization of fine has also been stayed. 6. In support of his contention for an order to stay the sentence, learned counsel cited the decision of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others vs. The State of Gujarat reported in A.I.R. 1999 S.C.1859. The Honble Supreme Court has held in this case that when a convict person is sentenced to a fix period of sentence and when he files appeal under any statutory right suspension of sentence can be considered by the appellate Court liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances. Of course if there is any statutory restriction against suspension of sentence it is a different matter. Of course if there is any statutory restriction against suspension of sentence it is a different matter. Similarly, when the sentence is life imprisonment the consideration for suspension of sentence could be of a different approach. But if for any reason the sentence of limited duration cannot be suspended every endeavour could be made to dispose of the appeal on merits more so when motion for expeditious hearing the appeal is made in such case. Otherwise the very valuable right of appeal would be an exercise in futility by afflux of time. When the appellate court finds that due to practical reasons such appeals cannot be disposed of expeditiously the appellate court must bestow special concern in the matter of suspending the sentence, so as to make the appeal right meaningful and effective. Of course the appellate court can impose similar conditions when bail is granted. The Honble Supreme Court further held that when the High Court was not inclined to hear the appeal expeditiously the sentence passed on the appellants can be suspended on some stringent condition. In the circumstance, the Honble Supreme Court had suspended the sentence and directed the appellants to be released on bail in the cited case. 7. Citing the ratio as laid down in the above cited decision, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is a sitting Mukhiya and the offence alleged does not involve any moral turpitude. It was further submitted that the appellant has already been allowed bail by this Court and the realization of fine has also been stayed till disposal of the appeal. Learned counsel continued to submit that this appeal is of the year 2010 and presently similar appeal of 7-8 years back is being listed for hearing and there is no likelihood of listing and hearing of this appeal in near future. Learned counsel also submits that if the sentence is not stayed it may incur a disability in the functioning of the appellant in his office as a Mukhiya. Learned counsel further submits that the suspension of sentence is virtually operative when the appellant has been allowed bail by this Court and the realization of fine has been stayed. Learned counsel submits that he has not prays for the stay of the conviction but he simply seeks stay of the sentence passed by the trial court. 8. Learned counsel further submits that the suspension of sentence is virtually operative when the appellant has been allowed bail by this Court and the realization of fine has been stayed. Learned counsel submits that he has not prays for the stay of the conviction but he simply seeks stay of the sentence passed by the trial court. 8. In the facts and circumstances, I feel it just and proper to pass an specific order in this regard that the sentence passed on the appellant is stayed, therefore, it is hereby ordered that the sentence passed on the appellant will remain stayed till disposal of the appeal. 9. The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.