JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant and learned public prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence and perused the judgment impugned dated 16.05.2022 passed by Learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act 2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights 2005 No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan First in Sessions Case No. 49/2020 whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under sections 366 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of five years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 50,000/-; under section 323 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of one year simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 500/-, under section 341 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of one month simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 300/- as well as under section 376 IPC and has been sentenced with maximum of ten years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that the appellant is innocent. He has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated by the complainant due to personal vengeance. In order to buttress his submission, it is contended that the prosecutrix is a 21 years old major and educated lady but the matter was not reported promptly to the police. In her written report Ex.P1, it is alleged that accused abducted her and made an attempt to molest her but subsequent thereto, she made significant and material improvement and alleged that she was subjected to rape. In this view of the matter, learned counsel further submits that the infirmity appearing in her testimony makes her an unreliable witness. It is asserted that though the conclusion can be based on the statement of solitary witness but at the same time, it is the requirement of law that the evidence of solitary witness must be of sterling-worth and the material produced in this regard must be of impeccable quality and the same should be free from every impeachment. The appellant has strenuously argued that there is hope of success in appeal but the same would likely to take a long time and pending appeal, keeping him behind the bars would surely jeopardize the rights of the accused. He was on bail during the entire course of the trial but the liberty was never misused. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted. 3. He was on bail during the entire course of the trial but the liberty was never misused. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant for releasing the appellant on bail. 4. Considering the overall submissions of the parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case while refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of the appeal, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant. 5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by Learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act 2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights 2005 No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan First in Sessions Case No. 49/2020 vide judgment dated 16.05.2022 against the appellant-applicant-Pawan Kumar S/o Shri Jitendar Kumar Mahawar shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 13.02.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedapplicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. 6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedapplicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case, the said accused-applicant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.