JUDGMENT 1. - The criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 8.5.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate court') on an application filed by the petitioner for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. 2. Brief facts of the case are that vide judgment dated 7.2.2014, the petitioner along with one Ashok Kumar was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Revdar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Case No.89/2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment for each offences and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- was also imposed for each offence. It was also ordered by the trial court that in default of payment of fine, the petitioner and other co-accused shall further undergo one month's simple imprisonment for each offence. 3. Being aggrieved with the judgment dated 7.2.2014, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate court which is pending. Along with the said appeal, the petitioner moved an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence awarded by the learned trial court vide judgment dated 7.2.2014. The said application was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 8.5.2014 while observing that in three of six cases, the Juvenile Justice Court released the petitioner on probation and in two other similar nature of cases, the trial is pending against him and, therefore, the sentence awarded by the learned trial court is not liable to be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. Being aggrieved with the order dated 8.5.2014, the petitioner has filed this criminal misc. petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner remained in custody for about one and a half year and served considerable period of sentence during pendency of the trial and looking to this fact alone, he is entitled to be released on bail. It is also submitted that sentence of the co-accused Ashok Kumar has already been suspended by the trial court and, hence, the petitioner is also entitled for the same benefit. It is further prayed that the order passed by the learned appellate court dated 8.5.2014 may be quashed and sentence awarded to the petitioner by the trial court may be ordered to be suspended. 5. It is further prayed that the order passed by the learned appellate court dated 8.5.2014 may be quashed and sentence awarded to the petitioner by the trial court may be ordered to be suspended. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has supported the order passed by the appellate court dated 8.5.2014 and prayed that this criminal misc. petition may kindly be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. 7. The learned trial court has rejected the application of the petitioner for suspension of sentence solely on the ground that other similar nature of cases are pending against the petitioner. The trial court has not taken into consideration the fact that at the time of passing of the order dated 8.5.2014, the petitioner was remained in custody for about more than a year. It is also submitted that the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the trial court whereby he was convicted and sentenced is still pending before the appellate court and the petitioner has already served a considerable period of sentence. The sentence of other co-accused persons, convicted for the similar offences, has already been suspended by the appellate court. 8. Looking to the above facts and circumstances of the case, this criminal misc. petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 8.5.2014 passed by the appellate court is quashed. The application filed by the petitioner under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence is allowed and the the sentence awarded by the trial court vide order dated 7.2.2014 is hereby suspended provided the petitioner Balwant Ram furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned appellate court for his appearance as and when ordered to do so with a condition incorporated in the bond that as and when he leaves the place of his residence, he will intimate to the learned appellate court about his new place of residence.Appeal allowed. *******