Judgment : 1. This is an application filed by accused No.6 in S.C.No.737 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc) Fast Track III, Pathanamthitta, who is appellant No.2 in the Criminal Appeal. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for various other terms under certain other sections of the Indian Penal Code. 2. It is stated that the petitioner was a practicing lawyer at the time when the judgment was passed by the Sessions Court. He hails from a poor family. According to the petitioner, he was falsely implicated in the case. While undergoing imprisonment in Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram, he appeared for the Entrance Examination for LLM Course, after getting permission from the Superintendent of Central Prison. Thereafter on 5.2.2013, the petitioner was released from the Central Prison on granting parole for thirty days. It is stated that on 7.2.2013 a provisional rank list was published in respect of the LLM Course, in which, the petitioner secured 82nd position. The petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Caste. A selection memo (provisional) was issued in favour of the petitioner. The Petitioner was admitted for the LLM Course. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that now the petitioner has got admission for the LLM Course in the Law College, Kozhikode. Classes have already commenced, submits the counsel. 4. The prayer in the application is to suspend the execution of the sentence and to release the petitioner on bail for a period of three years. 5. An objection is filed by the Jailor of Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram, in which it is stated that the petitioner has to apply under Rule 280A of the Kerala Prisons Rules, 1958 and that the power under sub-section (6) of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be exercised by the Government to suspend the sentence. 6. 5. An objection is filed by the Jailor of Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram, in which it is stated that the petitioner has to apply under Rule 280A of the Kerala Prisons Rules, 1958 and that the power under sub-section (6) of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be exercised by the Government to suspend the sentence. 6. Rule 280 A of the Kerala Prisons Rules, 1958 reads as follows: “280 A – Release of a person undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for the purpose of study – A prisoner who is desirous of continuing the study in a College so as to complete a degree course may be released by Government for such period as may be necessary for the purpose, by suspending the sentence under sub-section (6) of section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such release shall be governed by the rules, if any, issued by the Government in the behalf.” 7. Sub-section (1) of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows: “432. Power to Suspend or remit sentences.—(1) When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an offence, the appropriate Government may, at any time, without conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.” 8. Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply at a stage when conviction and sentence have become final. In other words, it is post judicial power of the Government. The judicial function of the Court culminates by passing a judgment in accordance with law. The executive function of the State under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would commence only when the conviction has become final. In the present case, the conviction and sentence are challenged in appeal and the appeal is pending. When a Criminal Appeal is pending, the Government have no power under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend the execution of the sentence or to remit the whole or any part of the punishment. A specific power is provided under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure enabling the Court to suspend the execution of the sentence. The Court has no power to grant remission of sentence. A specific power is provided under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure enabling the Court to suspend the execution of the sentence. The Court has no power to grant remission of sentence. The power under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to suspend the execution of the sentence and if the convicted person is in confinement, to release him on bail. That power can be exercised only pending any appeal by a convicted person. If it is to be interpreted that even pending appeal the Government would have jurisdiction to grant suspension of sentence under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that would lead to exercise of the power concurrently by the Appellate Court as well as by the Government. That is not what is intended by Sections 432 and 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply only pending appeal and Section 432 would apply at the post conviction stage and after the conviction has become final. (See K.M. Nanavati v. The State of Bombay ( AIR 1961 SC 112 ). In these circumstances, we reject the contention raised in the objection. 9. The petitioner has prayed for suspension of sentence for a period of three years. LLM Couse, as of now, is only for a period of two years. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the suspension of the execution of sentence as against the petitioner can be granted initially for a limited period upto 31.5.2014 to enable him to undergo his studies for LLM. The question of granting suspension of execution of sentence for the period after 31.5.2014 will be considered only later, after taking into account the conduct of the petitioner inside and outside the college. Accordingly, the application is allowed in the following terms :- a) The suspension of the execution of the sentence as against the petitioner is granted upto 31.5.2014 on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-with two solvent sureties, before the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc) Fast Track III, Pathanamthitta, within two weeks from today. b) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of this Court. b) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of this Court. c) The petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activity or in any prejudicial activity during the currency of the period of suspension of sentence. d) The petitioner would be free to apply for extension of the period at any time after 31.12.2013 on getting a conduct certificate from the Principal of the college certifying the good conduct and character and a certificate containing the details regarding attendance and all other relevant aspects with respect to the petitioner and also his conduct outside the college.