'Hajj Travel Not An Absolute Right, Can Be Undertaken After Serving Sentence': Allahabad HC Denies Relief To S. 304 IPC Convict

A bench of Justice Alok Mathur observed that the right to do a Pilgrimage tour to the Hajj is not absolute, and the same could be curtailed as granting bail at this point may increase the chances of him fleeing outside the clutches of the law of this country.

The bench, however, added that such religious veneration can be duly exercised by him after serving his time in prison.

“…the appellant would be at liberty to exercise his option for Haj after completing his sentence in accordance with law. Article 21 grants the person liberty to individual in accordance with law and it is injunction against the State not to deprive any one except in accordance with law. Incarceration subsequent to a conviction fairly amounts to curtail of the right to movement in accordance with provision of law and accordingly the same cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal,” the single judge noted in his order.

Case in brief

Prior to conviction, Appellant-Jahir had applied for Hajj along with his wife and had deposited the fee for this purpose. Subsequently, he was selected to go Hajj Yatra scheduled from May 4, 2025, to June 16, 2025.

Meanwhile, he was convicted and sentenced by Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraich for 10 years under Section 304/34 IPC and for six months under Section 323 IPC.

Challenging the order of conviction, he moved the HC and also filed a short bail application for seeking nod to travel abroad for Hajj.

His counsel primarily relied upon the Delhi High Court's ruling in the case of Syed Abu Ala Vs. NCB 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 334 wherein the HC had allowed 73 year old man, convicted under the NDPS Act in 2010, to travel abroad for performing Hajj, noting that the Hajj pilgrimage holds immense significance in the Islamic faith.

The AGA on the other hand, opposed his short-term bail.

High Court's observations

At the outset, the bench noted that the appellant, who has been sentenced to 10 years in jail, has spent only one month in jail (since March 26, 2025).

Furthermore, it observed that Short-term bail/parole, though not provided under statute, is recognized by courts for certain exigencies like critical illness or family emergencies.

The Single Judge noted that while Hajj is an obligation of a person following the Muslim faith, such short-term bail cannot be granted merely because the application for Hajj Yatra was submitted and approved before the appellant was sentenced.

“Undoubtedly there is no denying fact that it is a Haj obligation of Muslim faith, even significance to every person following such faith but on the other hand merely because application was submitted prior to his sentence and the same has been allowed cannot be a reason to grant short term bail to the appellant. It is noticed that he is a convict under Section 304/34 IPC along with Section 323 IPC with the charges which are very serious and is being sentenced for the period of 10 years. Once month has been passed incarceration,” the bench remarked.

Further, distinguishing the instant case from that of Syed Abu Ala case, the Court said that in that particular case the petitioner had served 10 years out of the 11.5-year sentence, which justified his bail; however, here the Appellant has served only one month of a 10-year term.

Against this backdrop, adding that it is mandatory to complete the entire sentence before being released and that the likelihood of a prisoner absconding is to be considered while deciding the bail application, the bench refused to allow his plea.