Prayagraj: Allahabad High Court has stayed the conviction and sentence of a man convicted in a 2017 murder case after noting that he wished to contest the 2027 Uttar Pradesh assembly election either as an independent candidate or, if possible, on a BJP ticket.
A two-judge bench comprising Justice Siddharth and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi passed the order while hearing a criminal appeal filed by Nandlal Rai alias Babloo Rai, who was convicted by the Varanasi sessions court in 2025 in connection with a 2017 murder case which was registered at Sigra police station.
The court granted bail to the appellant, noting that he was a political figure and an active Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) worker before his conviction.
“Keeping in view the right to livelihood of a common man which is not less important than the right to contest election by a politician, conviction and sentence of appellant deserves to be stayed so that he may be able to survive for hearing the final verdict in his above noted appeal,” the court added.
In the order dated October 5, the high court referred to a Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Afjal Ansari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh to observe that the top court had stayed the conviction of a number of public representatives while holding that the “politicians bear special duty towards their constituents and failure to secure stay of conviction may lead to loss of opportunity to contest election and granted stay of conviction to the politicians/ legislators”.
The accused-appellant had sought bail and a stay of conviction on the ground that he had not been named in the FIR and that his alleged involvement was disclosed only around 17 days after the FIR was lodged.
The case pertained to the murder of Pramod Kumar Nigam, an active member of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. The accused-appellant was associated with gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari, and he allegedly murdered Nigam over a minor dispute.
During the course of the hearing, his counsel also argued that Nigam, the deceased, was politically active and Rai was implicated merely on suspicion and conjecture.
After considering the submissions of the parties and the circumstances of the case, the high court said that the appellant’s conviction and sentence deserved to be stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
