JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on D.B. Criminal Misc. 4th (Suspension of Sentence) Application No. 1064/2023. 2. The third application of Suspension of Sentence Application was rejected by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.09.2022. 3. Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submitted that he is making his primary submissions on the prolonged custody which is eleven years, seven months and twenty nine days with remission. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant further submitted that the family members of two brothers while contesting a piece of property, engaged in the fight which resulted into death of one of the brothers namely Mangi Lal. Learned counsel also submitted that there is a single injury on the body of deceased Mangi Lal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has referred to the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, SLP (Crl.) No. 4633/2021 (decided on 05.10.2021) and Firoz Khan vs. State of Rajasthan, D.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 624/2023 (decided on 11.08.2023) and submitted that the allegations do not fall in the category to the exception of the case of Saudan Singh (supra). 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for Suspension of Sentence. However, he was not in a position to refute the custody period of eleven years, seven months and twenty nine days with remission and also the applicability of the judgments rendered in the case of Saudan Singh (supra) and Firoz Khan (supra). 7. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant thus submitted that the Suspension of Sentence Application deserves to be allowed as the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take a long time. 8. On a conjoint consideration of prolonged custody period of eleven years, seven months and twenty nine days, so also the fact the there is a single injury, fight had taken place between the family members, particularly the brothers with no premeditation, and the application of the precedent law laid down in the cases of Saudan Singh (supra) and Firoz Khan (supra) applies, this Court deems it appropriate to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellantapplicant in this case, at this stage. 9. Accordingly, D.B. Criminal Misc. 9. Accordingly, D.B. Criminal Misc. 4th (Suspension of Sentence) Application No. 1064/2023 filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 11.01.2017 in Sessions Case No. 14/2013 against appellant-applicant Madan Das S/o Shri Poonam Das shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, 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 03.10.2023 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 months of January and July of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the appellant 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, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 10. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.