JUDGMENT : B.N. Karia, J.:-- ORAL ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 58 of 2022 1. By preferring present appeal, appellant has requested to quash and set aside the judgment and order of sentence dated 26.11.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI Court No. 5, Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No. 10 of 2016 convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 120B, 420, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. 2. Heard learned advocate for the appellant. 3. It was submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that present appellant has not put his any sign in the above documents nor has he prepared it. Moreover nor prosecution witnesses are not reliable and trustworthy. Still however learned Trial Court failed to appreciate said facts and thereby erred in passing impugned judgment and order of conviction. That, learned trial court had erred in not appreciating the documentary evidence produced below Exh. 57, being Post Sanction Inspection Report dated 04.09.2014 is produced by PW-1-Milind Duttatre Taamne wherein present appellant has no rile to play nor any illegality is committed by him therein. That, documentary evidence produced on record vide Ex. 74, being CA Certificate issued by other CA as well as Exh. 75 requisition being made for sanctioning of loan by other C.A. and Exh. 14 being Pre Sanction Inspection Report dated 09.05.2009, which was carried out by accused no. 2 Shri D.R. Parmar, Senior Manager were not properly appreciated by the trial court. That, Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2022 was preferred by the co-accused, which was admitted by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2022. 4. ADMIT. Learned APP waives service of notice of admission for and on behalf of the respondent No. 2-State. Learned Special PP waives service of notice of admission for and on behalf of the respondent no. 1. 5. Registry to tag present appeal with Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2022. ORAL ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION No. 1 of 2022: 6. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No. 2-State. Learned Special PP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no. 1. 7. ORAL ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION No. 1 of 2022: 6. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No. 2-State. Learned Special PP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no. 1. 7. By preferring this application, applicant has requested to suspend the sentence imposed upon the applicant by learned Special Judge, CBI Court No. 5, Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No. 10 of 2016 on 26.11.2021. 8. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the respondent no. 2-State and learned Special PP for the respondent no. 1. 9. It was submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that present applicant has not put his any sign in the above documents nor has he prepared it. Moreover nor prosecution witnesses are not reliable and trustworthy. Still however learned Trial Court failed to appreciate said facts and thereby erred in passing impugned judgment and order of conviction. That, learned trial court had erred in not appreciating the documentary evidence produced below Exh. 57, being Post Sanction Inspection Report dated 04.09.2014 is produced by PW-1-Milind Duttatre Taamne wherein present applicant has no rile to play nor any illegality is committed by him therein. That, documentary evidence produced on record vide Ex. 74, being CA Certificate issued by other CA as well as Exh. 75 requisition being made for sanctioning of loan by other C.A. and Exh. 14 being Pre Sanction Inspection Report dated 09.05.2009, which was carried out by accused no. 2 Shri D.R. Parmar, Senior Manager were not properly appreciated by the trial court. That, Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2022 was preferred by the co-accused, which was admitted by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2022. 10. It was further submitted that the captioned appeal was admitted by this court today and during the course of trial, the applicant was released on bail and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the applicant to suspend the sentence imposed upon the applicant till hearing and final disposal of the captioned appeal. 11. Learned APP for the respondent no. 2 State and learned Special PP for the respondent no. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the applicant to suspend the sentence imposed upon the applicant till hearing and final disposal of the captioned appeal. 11. Learned APP for the respondent no. 2 State and learned Special PP for the respondent no. 1 have strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the applicant and submitted that the applicant was rightly convicted by the learned trial court as he was involved in the serious offence and ultimately, they have requested to dismiss the prayer made by the applicant in the present application. 12. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties, it appears that the captioned appeal is admitted by this court today itself and looking to the pendency of the old cases, captioned appeal is not likely to be heard and disposed of in near future. Moreover, during the course of trial, applicant was on bail and he has not misused liberty granted in him favour while releasing him on bail. Hence, prayer of the applicant requires consideration. 13. Thus, considering the facts mentioned above, till hearing and final disposal of the Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 2022, the sentence imposed upon the applicant vide judgment and order of sentence dated 26.11.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI Court No. 5, Ahmedabad in CBI Special Case No. 10 of 2016 stands suspended and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail on same terms and conditions as were prescribed by the trial Court; but with fresh bail bond and surety. 14. Accordingly, present application stands allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.