In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-6937 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:17.3.2009 Kewal Krishan .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C.' - for short) for staying the conviction of the petitioner in pursuance of the judgment dated 26.7.2007 (Annexure-P.1) passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot in case titled State v. Kewal Krishan, L.C, and others. The petitioner along with two others was prosecuted for having committed offences punishable under Sections 223 and 224 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' – for short). It was alleged that on 13.1.2008 at about 8.45 p.m. in the area of City Faridkot all the accused being public servants of Punjab Police Department posted at Police Lines, Faridkot were deputed at the Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot for supervision of an accused, namely, Baldev Singh. The said Baldev Singh escaped from the custody of the Police. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate after Cr. Misc. No.M-6937/2009 [2] considering the evidence and material on record convicted and sentenced the petitioner and his two co-accused to rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay a fine of Rs.500/-. The petitioner aggrieved from his conviction has preferred an appeal (Annexure-P.2) which is pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot. The Sessions Judge, Faridkot vide order dated 18.8.2007 (Annexure-P.3) has suspended the sentence of imprisonment. The present criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for staying the conviction of the petitioner as well. Leaned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order of conviction can be stayed only by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, therefore, he has filed the petition seeking suspension of conviction of the petitioner in this Court. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that against the order dated 26.7.2007 (Annexure-P.1) an appeal is pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot. The sentence that has been imposed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has been suspended by the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot vide order dated 18.8.2007 (Annexure-P.3). The contention of the learned counsel that an application for suspension of conviction would be maintainable only in this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is not tenable. In K.C. Sareen v. C.B.I., Chandigarh, JT 2001 (6) SC 59, it was observed that the legal position, therefore, is this: Though the power to suspend an order of conviction, apart from order of sentence, is not alien to Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, its exercise should be limited to very exceptional cases. Therefore, evidently, Section 389(1) Cr.P.C is not Cr. Misc. No.M-6937/2009 [3] confined to suspending the sentence alone and in fact power to suspend the order of conviction is not alien to the provisions of Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. As such, the petitioner is in the first instance liable to avail his remedy before the Sessions Court. Admittedly, he has not availed that remedy so far and the appeal is also pending in the said Court. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner may, if so advised, in the first instance avail his remedy before the Court of Session in the first instance. March 17, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*