The Supreme Court set aside the Kerala High Court's order suspending the conviction of MP Mohd. Faizal for the following reasons:

• In its ruling, the Supreme Court noted that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction by granting a stay on Faizal's conviction without proper grounds.
• The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court had failed to consider the seriousness of the crime and the implications it had in terms of public interest and ethical standards.
• The Court highlighted that the suspension of conviction should only be granted in exceptional circumstances and should not be used as a routine practice.
• Furthermore, it was argued that granting a stay on conviction would undermine the principle of fairness, jeopardize the credibility of the justice system, and potentially enable those convicted to continue holding public office without serving their sentence.
• The Supreme Court believed that the High Court had erred in its decision and thereby set it aside, upholding the significance of the criminal justice system and the importance of convicting individuals based on the evidence presented.

Overall, the Supreme Court's decision aimed to emphasize the proper functioning and integrity of the justice system, ensuring that convictions are not easily set aside, particularly in cases of public interest involving elected representatives.