Supreme Court denies stay of conviction, stressing stay is an exceptional power, not routine relief

The SC dismissed the petition seeking a stay of conviction, emphasizing that granting such relief is an exceptional power, not routine. The Court distinguished the present case from Afjal Ansari, where a stay was granted due to the appellant's status as a sitting MP. The SC also disagreed with the Delhi HC's decision in Dilip Ray, which held that a convicted person should be granted a stay to contest elections, finding it inconsistent with the established ratio. Consequently, the petition for stay of conviction was rejected.

---

---

The Supreme Court, with Hon'ble Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar presiding, upheld the impugned judgment rejecting the petitioner's plea for stay of conviction. The Court relied on its prior decision in Afjal Ansari v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 2 SCC 187], emphasizing that granting a stay of conviction is "not a matter of routine, but a power to be exercised in an exceptional situation." Unlike Afjal Ansari, where the appellant was a sitting Member of Parliament justifying relief, the petitioner here did not present comparable facts. The Court also noted that the Delhi High Court in Dilip Ray v. CBI [2024 SCC OnLine Del 2522] misapplied Afjal Ansari by holding that a convicted person should be granted stay merely to contest elections. Consequently, the special leave petition was dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to seek early hearing of the appeal before the High Court. Pending applications were disposed of.

---