Matter Does Not Fall Within Ambit Of Rare Case: Allahabad HC Refuses To Stay Sentence Of Afzal Ansari, Grants Him Bail
|The Allahabad High Court has refused to stay the sentence of former Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) MP, Afzal Ansari but has granted bail to him.
The Court said that the matter does not fall within the ambit of the rare case so as to warrant the suspension of conviction of the appellant.
A Single Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh held, “After giving thoughtful consideration to all attending facts of the case, nature of offence of which the appellant has been convicted and the aforesaid position of law, this Court is of considered view that the instant case does not fall within the ambit of such rare case so as to warrant suspension of conviction of appellant and thus, no case for suspension or stay of conviction of appellant is made out. It is correct that this Court is allowing the prayer of suspension of sentence during pendency of appeal, but as stated above, the legal position and parameters for stay of conviction are quite different.”
The Bench noted that only in an exceptional case, the appellate court may put the conviction in abeyance along with the sentence.
Senior Advocate G.S. Chaturvedi appeared on behalf of the appellant while Advocate D.K. Singh appeared for the victim and AAG Manish Goyal appeared for the State.
Factual Background -
The appellant was convicted under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (Gangsters Act) and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, vide judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, MP/MLA Court, Ghazipur. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in a correct perspective and there was no credible evidence that the appellant was a member of any gang.
The appellant was the Member of Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh 5 times and a Member of Parliament two times. Presently, the appellant was an MP from Ghazipur Constituency since 2019, but after the judgment of the Trial Court, he was disqualified from membership. Earlier, on July 4, the High Court had directed the Jail Superintendent to furnish a medical report of the appellant.
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel observed, “It appears that though offence enumerated under Section 3(1) of Gangster Act is not provided sub-section (1) or sub-section (2)] of section 8 of Act of 1951, but sub-section (3) provides a person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years [other than any offence referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2)] of section 8 of the Act shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release, subject to the conditions mentioned therein.”
The Court said that the only contention raised was that if the effect and operation of the impugned judgment and order is not stayed, the appellant will remain disqualified under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951. It added that except this, no other specific consequence which is likely to fall upon conviction, was shown.
“Let the appellant Afjal Ansari convicted and sentenced in aforesaid case be released on bail during pendency of the appeal, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned”, directed the Court.
Accordingly, the Court rejected the prayer for a stay of conviction and granted bail to the appellant.
Cause Title- Afzal Ansari v. State of U.P.