The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to former Uttar Pradesh minister Mohd. Azam Khan and his son Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan in the Dual PAN Case, but has refused to suspend their convictions, pointing to their criminal antecedents and the need to keep criminality out of electoral politics.
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court on October 29, 2026, suspended the sentences of Samajwadi Party leader Mohd. Azam Khan and his son Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan and directed their release on bail in the case over a second PAN card allegedly used in Abdullah’s 2017 nomination papers, while dismissing their prayer to stay their convictions [Mohd. Azam Khan v. State of U.P. and Others].
Justice Samit Gopal passed the order in two connected criminal revisions, Criminal Revision No. 3893 of 2026 filed by Azam Khan and Criminal Revision No. 3685 of 2026 filed by Abdullah Azam Khan. A revision by the State seeking further enhancement of their sentences, Criminal Revision No. 5514 of 2026, has been heard alongside. Judgment was reserved on October 15 and delivered on October 29.
The case
The prosecution case began with an FIR lodged on December 6, 2019 by Akash Saxena. According to the prosecution, Abdullah Azam Khan held a PAN card showing his date of birth as January 1, 1993, in line with his educational records, but a second PAN card showing his date of birth as September 30, 1990 was obtained and used in his nomination papers filed on January 24, 2017 for the 34-Swar Assembly constituency in Rampur. The complainant alleged that the documents were prepared in a conspiracy with his father to get past the minimum age requirement for contesting the election.
By a judgment dated November 17, 2025 in Criminal Case No. 311 of 2022, the Special Judge (MP/MLA)/First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur convicted both men under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each to a maximum of seven years under Section 467. On appeal, the Special Judge (MP/MLA)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Rampur, by judgments of April 20 and May 23, 2026, enhanced Azam Khan’s sentence under Section 467 to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2 lakh. Abdullah Azam Khan’s maximum sentence stands at seven years’ rigorous imprisonment. The sentences run concurrently.
The arguments
Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and N.I. Jafri, appearing for both revisionists, argued that the revisions stood a fair chance of success and that the prayer for stay of conviction should be considered leniently, since the convictions carry a disqualification that would impair their future prospects and cause irreparable loss. They relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Afjal Ansari v. State of U.P. on suspension of conviction in the context of disqualification under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and also raised a plea of double jeopardy.
Additional Advocate General Anoop Trivedi appeared for the State, and counsel for the first informant filed objections opposing the pleas.
ALSO READ: Allahabad High Court Stays Murder Conviction Of Man Seeking To Contest 2027 UP Polls
Bail granted on sentence
The Court recorded that Azam Khan had been in jail in the case for 4 years, 1 month and 9 days, and Abdullah Azam Khan for 3 years, 6 months and 13 days, including remission, according to the custody certificates. Since the case involves fixed-term sentences and the revisions are pending, it held that both deserved bail.
“Looking to the nature of occurrence, period of detention of the accused/revisionists, the fact that the case in hand is for a fixed term of sentence, the present case is a fit case where the accused/revisionists- Mohd. Azam Khan and Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan be enlarged on bail.”
Both were directed to be released on a personal bond with two sureties each, and to deposit half of the fine imposed by the appellate court forthwith.
No stay of conviction
On the prayer to stay the convictions, the Court said that criminal antecedents, the gravity of the offences and the wider social impact have to be weighed. It quoted the Supreme Court’s observations in Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India on keeping persons with criminal antecedents out of politics:
“Substantial efforts have to be undertaken to cleanse the polluted stream of politics by prohibiting people with criminal antecedents so that they do not even conceive of the idea of entering into politics. They should be kept at bay.”
On the revisionists’ own showing, the Court noted, Azam Khan is involved in 92 criminal cases, has been convicted in eight matters (two by Sessions courts and six by Magistrate courts) and has 81 cases pending, while Abdullah Azam Khan is involved in 46 cases, has been convicted in four matters by Magistrate courts and has 44 cases pending.
“Thus looking to the criminal antecedents of the accused/revisionists, their previous conviction(s), involvement in large number of criminal cases, no justifiable reason is coming forward for entertaining the plea for suspension of conviction.”
ALSO READ: Allahabad HC Reserves Judgment on Azam Khan Family’s ‘Forgery Case’ Appeals
What happens next
The revisions were admitted, the hearing was expedited as the trial court records have been received, and the matters will be listed for final hearing in the third week of January 2027. The convictions remain under challenge, and the Court’s order on interim relief is not a final finding on the merits of the revisions.
Why the order matters
The order applies the settled distinction between suspension of sentence and suspension of conviction. Suspending a fixed-term sentence after long custody is routine while an appeal or revision is pending, but staying a conviction is an exceptional relief because it wipes out, for the time being, the legal consequences of the finding of guilt, including disqualification from contesting elections.
By declining to stay the convictions, the Court has left in place the disqualification under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 ahead of the next Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections. It treated the number of pending cases and previous convictions as decisive, while the revisionists’ arguments on the merits, including double jeopardy, remain to be decided at the final hearing.
Case Title: Mohd. Azam Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others [Criminal Revision No. 3893 of 2026], with Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others [Criminal Revision No. 3685 of 2026]
Bench: Justice Samit Gopal, Allahabad High Court
Date of Order: October 29, 2026 (reserved on October 15, 2026)
Counsel for Revisionists: Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and N.I. Jafri, with Shashwat Anand, Nizam Pasha, Arif Ali, Ankur Azad, Shashank Tiwari, Shrey, Sadrul Islam Jafri and Saumitra Anand
Counsel for State: Anoop Trivedi, Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General, with Paritosh Kumar Malviya, AGA
Counsel for First Informant: Sharad Sharma