New Delhi, August 15, 2025 — Former Uttar Pradesh MLA Abbas Ansari, recently disqualified from the state assembly following a criminal conviction, has now approached the Supreme Court of India seeking a relaxation of stringent bail conditions imposed in a case filed under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Disqualification from Assembly
Ansari, son of late gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari, was convicted in May 2025 by a Mau court in a 2022 hate speech case, earning a two-year prison sentence. As per Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, this led to his immediate disqualification as an MLA from the Mau Sadar constituency.
He has challenged this conviction before the Allahabad High Court, where the bench has reserved its judgment. His request for interim relief—seeking a stay on the conviction—was earlier denied.
Bail in Gangsters Act Case
Abbas Ansari is also embroiled in a separate criminal case under the Gangsters Act, lodged in Chitrakoot in August 2024. The case accuses him of maintaining an unlawful network and operating with criminal intent.
On March 7, 2025, the Supreme Court, in an order passed by a bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, granted him six weeks of interim bail, but with strict conditions, including:
- Staying only at his official residence in Lucknow.
- Not visiting his constituency (Mau) without prior permission from the trial court and local police.
- A ban on leaving Uttar Pradesh without court approval.
- A gag on speaking about the case publicly.
- Submission of a status report on his compliance.
Later, on May 16, 2025, a modified order was issued by a reconstituted bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, allowing him to stay at his Ghazipur residence for up to three nights when traveling between Lucknow and Mau.
Fresh Plea Before Justice Kant and Justice Bagchi
As his interim bail nears expiry, Abbas Ansari has now filed a fresh plea before the same bench — Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi — requesting a relaxation of the bail restrictions, arguing that the original conditions are no longer relevant due to his disqualification as MLA and loss of his official accommodation.
Appearing for Ansari, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the court that:
- Ansari is no longer a sitting MLA.
- His government-provided residence in Lucknow has been vacated.
- He needs more flexibility to attend to family matters, including caring for his 2-year-old son, a hospitalized father-in-law, and managing affairs related to his brother’s arrest.
Justice Surya Kant, acknowledging the practical issues, noted:
“There was never an absolute travel ban. Permission was required, yes, but if there are real difficulties, we are open to considering them.”
The bench directed Abbas Ansari to file a short affidavit explaining the specific relief sought and the hardships caused by the current bail terms. The matter is scheduled to be heard again next week.
Legal and Political Implications
- The case highlights the interplay between criminal law and electoral politics, especially as Ansari’s disqualification stems from one case while he seeks bail in another.
- The Supreme Court’s approach, particularly under Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, reflects a measured balance between legal accountability and personal liberty.
- A pending verdict from the Allahabad High Court on his conviction appeal will play a crucial role in shaping his political future.
What Lies Ahead?
- A revised bail order may be issued if the Supreme Court is convinced of the hardship.
- The High Court’s reserved decision on the hate speech conviction could potentially overturn or uphold his disqualification.
- With his father's legacy and a strong local support base, Abbas Ansari remains a significant political figure in eastern Uttar Pradesh, despite mounting legal challenges.
In summary: Abbas Ansari—disqualified as an MLA following a hate speech conviction—is now seeking relief from the Supreme Court from strict bail conditions in a separate Gangsters Act case. The matter is being heard by Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who have shown openness to easing restrictions pending further submissions.