ORDER : P.P. BHATT, J. 1. The present application is filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the applicant-convict for suspension of sentence imposed upon him vide judgment and order dated 09.03.2016 passed by the learned Special Judge, Surendranagar, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 26 of 2015, whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted the applicant for the offence Sections 363 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced the applicant undergo to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default, to further undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and for the offence punishable under Sections 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, the applicant is ordered to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, to further undergo 2 months simple imprisonment. Learned Special Judge further convicted the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and ordered to undergo 9 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50,000/- in default, to further undergo one year simple imprisonment. Learned Special Judge further ordered to pay 50% of total fine amount to the victim. 2. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor along with Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person, however, he has been wrongly implicated in the alleged offences. It is submitted that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated evidence on record, more particularly, the evidence of prosecutrix, father and mother of the prosecutrix and thereby the applicant has been convicted and sentenced for the offences as stated above. It is submitted that the FIR was lodged after two and half months. It is further submitted that in fact, the applicant and prosecutrix were known to each other and there was friendly relationship between them and they used to meet also. It is further submitted that even the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case. Learned advocate further submits that co-accused is already released on bail by suspending the sentence by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the fine amount is not yet paid by the applicant. It is further submitted that even the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case. Learned advocate further submits that co-accused is already released on bail by suspending the sentence by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the fine amount is not yet paid by the applicant. Learned advocate upon instructions, states that without prejudice to the rights and contentions, the applicant will pay the half amount of fine imposed by the learned trial Court in respect of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act i.e. Rs. 25,000/- out of Rs. 50,000/- imposed by the trial Court. It is also submitted that the applicant will deposit the fine amount for the other offences as imposed by the learned trial Court including the amount of Rs. 25,000/- as stated above, within three weeks from the date of release of the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant will not claim refund of the said amount even, if he will succeed and acquitted in appeal. It is also submitted that the applicant was on bail during the trial and he has not committed breach of any conditions imposed by the Court below. The appeal preferred by the applicant is admitted by this Court, but chances of early final hearing of present criminal appeal on account of pendency of old criminal appeal, are very less. It is also submitted that the applicant raised many grounds in the appeal memo and the applicant-appellant is likely to succeed in appeal. It is further submitted that the applicant will abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Court and shall not commit any breach. Accordingly, while concluding submission, learned advocate submits that the applicant is having deep roots in Surendranagar District and also having responsibilities towards family and therefore his presence can be secured at the time of final hearing of Criminal Appeal by imposing appropriate condition as may be deemed fit & proper by this Court. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State while opposing the present application submits that there is sufficient evidence against the applicant, and therefore, looking to the gravity of offences, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State while opposing the present application submits that there is sufficient evidence against the applicant, and therefore, looking to the gravity of offences, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 5. Regard being had to the above submissions and considering the fact that the applicant was on bail during the trial and has not misused the liberty in any manner as also considering the possibility of having early final hearing of present criminal appeal due to pendency of criminal appeals; this Court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, discretion is required to be exercised in favour of the applicant. Hence, the present application is allowed and the order of sentence imposed by the learned Special Judge, Surendranagar, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 26 of 2015, dated 09.03.2016 shall remain under suspension till the final hearing and disposal of the main appeal. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing personal bail bond and surety in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court on the following terms and conditions that the applicant: (a) shall deposit the passport, if any, with the Trial Court, within a week. (b) shall not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; (c) shall not take undue advantage of their liberty or abuse his liberty maintain law and order. (d) shall furnish latest and permanent address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond, and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; (e) shall deposit the total amount of Rs. 40,000/- towards fine amount (Rs. 25,000/- being 50% of the fine amount imposed by the learned Special Court for POCSO offence and Rs. 15,000/- for IPC offences) before the concerned trial Court within a period of 03 weeks from the date of his release, without prejudice to the rights and contentions. The trial Court shall disburse the said amount in favour of the complainant - victim by A/c. Payee Cheque after proper verification. 15,000/- for IPC offences) before the concerned trial Court within a period of 03 weeks from the date of his release, without prejudice to the rights and contentions. The trial Court shall disburse the said amount in favour of the complainant - victim by A/c. Payee Cheque after proper verification. The fine amount shall not be refunded to the applicant, in case he succeeds in appeal and is acquitted. 6. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct Service is permitted.