ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence. 2. Learned counsel submits that the accused-appellant was on bail during trial. It is looking to the fact that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix did not make allegation against him for rape or other offences, rather, it is stated that she has married with the appellant. When marriage was not accepted by her family members, they went to the Superintendent of Police to seek protection. They were sent to the Police Station Peesangan to get protection. There, the police called their family members and from the Police Station Peesangan, she was taken by her family members. The statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded without fear and satisfaction to this effect was recorded by learned Magistrate. The prosecutrix in the court statement changed the story and made allegation, though, in the cross examination, she had categorically stated that they went to the Superintendent of Police to seek protection and thereupon, to the Police Station Peesangan, from where, she was taken by her family members. It is also stated that in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no allegation for commissioning of rape was made and same is the position of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., said to have been given under fear. No application to retract from the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was ever made before the court concerned. Thus, the court statement was under influence of the family members. The trial Court has ignored the aforesaid while convicting the accused-appellant. The prayer is accordingly to suspend the sentence. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence but it is agreed that during trial, the accused-appellant was on bail. 4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The perusal of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. along with cross examination of the court statement gives facts of the case. 4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The perusal of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. along with cross examination of the court statement gives facts of the case. At this stage, we do not want to make comment on the facts of the case, as it may otherwise affect either of the parties at the time of final hearing of the appeal, however, taking into consideration the material available on record and as the accused-appellant was on bail during trial, we are inclined to accept the application for suspension of sentence. Accordingly, the application for Suspension of Sentence is allowed and it is ordered that sentence awarded to accused-appellant namely Mr. Riyazuddin Ansari S/o Shri Kayamuddin by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act) Cases, Ajmer in Sessions Case No.129/2017 (158/2014) shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal and he be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 08th October, 2018 and whenever called upon to do so.