Court cites delayed naming in FIR, doubtful witness testimony, and possible irreversible consequences including loss of chance to contest 2027 Assembly election
The Allahabad High Court has stayed the conviction and sentence of Nandlal Rai alias Babloo Rai, who was convicted in a murder case, and ordered his release on bail during the pendency of his criminal appeal.
A Division Bench of Justice Siddharth and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi passed the order on 5 October 2026 in Criminal Appeal No. 1244 of 2026. The appeal challenges the trial court judgment dated 15 April 2025 in Sessions Trial No. 176 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2017, Police Station Sigra, Varanasi, under Sections 302 and 34 IPC.
According to the prosecution, the informant’s father was returning home from the market at about 7:30 p.m. when unknown assailants shot him dead. During the hearing on the bail application, the appellant argued that he was not named in the FIR and that his alleged role surfaced only around 17 days later through statements said to have been made by prosecution witnesses.
The defence contended that this delayed disclosure cast serious doubt on the prosecution case. It also argued that one witness was not an eye-witness at all, while another witness projected as an eye-witness did not support the prosecution during cross-examination. The appellant further questioned the alleged recovery of a pistol from a co-accused, claiming it was fabricated and planted. Counsel submitted that the case against Rai was largely circumstantial and lacked a complete and reliable chain of evidence.
The State opposed the plea for bail, but the High Court noted that the prosecution could not effectively dispute the defence submissions regarding delayed implication and weaknesses in witness testimony.
The Bench relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Afjal Ansari v. State of U.P., (2024) 2 SCC 187, which laid down that suspension of conviction under Section 389(1) CrPC depends on the peculiar facts of each case and whether refusal to stay conviction would cause injustice or irreversible consequences. The Supreme Court had said that such consequences must be assessed in light of factors like criminal antecedents, gravity of offence, and wider social impact.
The High Court observed that the appellant claimed to be politically active and desirous of contesting the 2027 election for Member of the Legislative Assembly. At the same time, the Bench remarked that the right to livelihood of an ordinary citizen is no less important than the right of a politician to contest elections. Even so, considering the overall facts, the Court held that the conviction and sentence deserved to be stayed so that the appellant could await the final outcome of the appeal without suffering irreversible prejudice.
The Court also took note of the fact that the appeal was filed in 2026 and was not likely to be heard in the near future. On this basis, and considering what it described as arguable infirmities in the prosecution case, it ordered suspension of both conviction and sentence and granted bail to the appellant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
The relief, however, was made subject to strict conditions. The Court directed that Rai shall not transfer, sell, alienate, or create any charge on any immovable property standing in his name without prior permission of the Court. He must also intimate any change of address within ten days, failing which the State may seek cancellation of bail.
In addition, the Bench ordered the appellant to deposit 50% of the fine within one month from the date of release from jail. The remaining 50% of the fine has been stayed during the pendency of the criminal appeal. The Court clarified that if the amount is not deposited within the stipulated period, it will be recovered in accordance with law.
The High Court has directed preparation of the paper book within six weeks, if not already prepared, and ordered that the appeal be listed for hearing in due course.
Bottom Line:
Suspension of conviction and sentence pending appeal - Convicted appellant in murder case granted bail and stay of conviction considering arguable infirmities in prosecution case, delayed disclosure of name, doubtful eye-witness account, pendency of appeal and possible irreversible consequences affecting right to contest election - Court also imposed conditions regarding property, address and deposit of 50% fine.
Statutory provision(s): Section 389(1) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Sections 302, 34 IPC, Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC
Nandlal Rai alias Babloo Rai v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2999687
