The Rajasthan High Court has permitted Mansoor Khan, a life convict whose sentence was suspended during appeal, to travel to the United Arab Emirates for employment purposes. The Court balanced the appellant's right to livelihood against the State's interest in ensuring his presence during trial proceedings.
Background & Facts
The Conviction & Sentence
The appellant, Mansoor Khan, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pokaran vide judgment dated 07.04.2026 in Sessions Case No.66/2017 under Sections 447, 341, 323/34, 325/34, and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The co-accused, Fateh Mohammad, was also convicted under the same sections.
The Appeal & Suspension of Sentence
The appellant filed Criminal Appeal (Db) No. 110/2026 before the Rajasthan High Court, which was admitted on 16.04.2026. The High Court suspended the sentence of the appellant vide order dated 25.05.2026 in D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.685/2026, allowing him to remain on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
The Application for Travel Abroad
The appellant filed I.A. No.01/2026 seeking permission to travel to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for employment during the pendency of the appeal. He submitted that he was regularly attending trial proceedings despite working in Abu Dhabi and that his livelihood depended on overseas employment.
The State's Opposition
The Public Prosecutor opposed the application, arguing that since the appellant had been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, allowing him to leave the country would be inappropriate.
The Court's Directions
The High Court directed the appellant to comply with strict conditions, including furnishing sureties and undertakings to ensure his presence during trial and final hearing of the appeal.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether an appellant whose life sentence has been suspended during appeal may be permitted to travel abroad for employment, subject to stringent conditions.
Arguments Presented
For the Appellant
The appellant's counsel argued that the appellant had been attending trial proceedings despite working in Abu Dhabi and that his livelihood depended on overseas employment. He submitted that the sentence had already been suspended and that the appellant would comply with all conditions stipulated by the Court.
For the Respondent
The Public Prosecutor opposed the application, contending that the appellant's conviction for serious offences warranted denial of permission to travel abroad, even with a suspended sentence.
The Court's Analysis
The Court acknowledged the appellant's conviction and life sentence but noted that the sentence had been suspended during the pendency of the appeal. The Court observed that the appeal itself had been filed in 2026 and was unlikely to be decided in the near future. Balancing the appellant's right to livelihood with the State's interest in ensuring his presence during trial, the Court held that it would be too harsh to deprive the appellant of the opportunity to earn his livelihood.
The Court emphasized that the appellant had given an undertaking to faithfully comply with all conditions stipulated in the order dated 25.05.2026, including appearing before the Trial Court as and when required. The Court also noted that the appellant had been on bail during the trial and had regularly attended proceedings despite his overseas employment.
"It is true that the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences under the aforementioned sections and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Against the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is pending consideration before this Court. During the pendency of the appeal, this Court, vide order dated 25.05.2026 has suspended the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant."
The Verdict
The Rajasthan High Court allowed the appellant's application to travel to the UAE for employment during the pendency of the appeal. The Court directed the appellant to:
- Furnish passport, visa, employment offer letter, and proposed duration of employment before the Trial Court.
- Furnish two solvent sureties of ₹1,00,000 each, one of whom must be a close family member.
- File an undertaking to remain present before the High Court at the time of the final hearing and disposal of the appeal.
- Appear before the Trial Court as and when required pursuant to the order for suspension of sentence.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Suspension of Sentence Does Not Waive Compliance
Practitioners must note that suspension of a life sentence does not absolve the convict of strict compliance with bail conditions. Courts will scrutinize undertakings and sureties to ensure the appellant's presence during trial and final hearing.
Right to Livelihood vs. State's Interest
The judgment underscores the Court's willingness to balance an appellant's right to livelihood with the State's interest in ensuring their presence during trial. Courts may permit travel abroad if stringent conditions are met and undertakings are provided.
Stringent Conditions Are Non-Negotiable
- Sureties: Two solvent sureties, one of whom must be a close family member, are mandatory.
- Undertakings: The appellant must file an undertaking to remain present during the final hearing.
- Compliance: The appellant must appear before the Trial Court as directed and furnish all required documents.
