Why Supreme Court stay of former Maharashtra agri minister’s conviction is significant

This February, the Nashik magistrate court sentenced Kokate to two years’ imprisonment in this case and fined him Rs 50,000. His brother was similarly convicted.

What does stay on conviction mean?

The stay of conviction by the Supreme Court means that his status as a convict is put on hold. Thus, some of the consequences of being a convict are also stayed. For instance, in cases where a convicted person is barred from certain appointments or jobs, a stay of conviction would bring relief.

In several orders, the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines on when a conviction can be stayed. It has said that the mere filing of an appeal cannot be grounds to stay the conviction altogether, and that the ramifications of keeping a conviction in abeyance need to be considered. The court has also said that a stay should be granted when the court is satisfied that there would be prejudice caused – ‘the applicant must satisfy the court as regards the evil that is likely to befall him, if the said conviction is not suspended’. (State Of Maharashtra Tr. C.B.I vs Balakrishna Dattatrya Kumbhar on 15 October, 2012-related to the conviction of an excise officer on charges of corruption).

So why was the SC relief crucial to Kokate to avoid disqualification?

As per the Representation of Peoples Act, a member of the legislature is disqualified if convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years. The only relief in such cases is a stay of the conviction, which would immediately void its consequences, such as disqualification.

After the high court refused to stay the conviction, Kokate faced imminent disqualification. If he had not been granted the relief, the Speaker of the legislative assembly would have had to initiate the proceedings to disqualify him.

In March 2023, a trial court in Surat sentenced Rahul Gandhi to two years in jail for criminal defamation over a remark in 2019 on the Modi surname. Gandhi was then disqualified from the Lok Sabha. The Gujarat High Court refused to stay the conviction, but the Supreme Court in August 2023 stayed the trial court judgment in August 2023, reversing his disqualification.

Why was the high court’s relief for Kokate not enough?

Last week, the High Court suspended Kokate’s two-year sentence or jail term imposed by the Nashik court, while refusing to stay the conviction. A suspension of sentence under section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code meant that Kokate cannot be arrested in the case till the appeal is finally disposed of. Since Kokate was sentenced to two years in jail, the suspension of the sentence means that the punishment cannot be executed till the appeal is heard.

Section 389 requires the court to record in writing its reasons for suspending the sentence pending the appeal. It takes into account that the appeal may not be decided expeditiously and other factors, such as the nature of the crime, sentence, whether there were any violations by the accused when they were out on bail. However, it does not halt his status as a ‘convict’, which could have disqualified him.

While the suspension of sentence can only mean that the punishment is stayed till the final disposal of the case, a stay on conviction puts a hold on his status as a convict. The HC had refused to stay the conviction, stating that it would “erode public confidence in democratic institutions and demoralise those who adhere to law.” The SC judges orally remarked that there is a “fundamental error” in the conviction itself and want to hear the case in detail before a decision.