Karnataka HC Releases A Bangladeshi Woman On Bail For The Offence Of Illegal Migration On The Bases Of Amended Citizenship Act

Must Read

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

Follow us

The Criminal Petition was filed before the High court of Karnataka under sec 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner/ Smt. Archana Purnima Pramanik on bail for the offence punishable under Sections 5, 12, 14 of Foreigners Act, Section 3(1)(c) of Citizenship Act & Section 465, 468, 471 of IPC was allowed.

Brief facts of the case

The petitioner was alleged that she is a Bangladeshi National and an illegal migrant. She obtained Indian documents like PAN Card, Aadhar Card in her name and on these documents, she fraudulently obtained an Indian Passport. Regarding the same, the complaint was lodged by the Assistant Passport Officer, Bengaluru. Petitioner was arrested on 07.11.2019. The application filed by her seeking release on bail has been dismissed by the LIX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore city, by order dated 04.12.2019, on the ground that there is prima facie material to show manipulation of records by the petitioner and that the matter is under investigation and in the event, she is released on bail, she may destroy the records or manipulate the records and may flee from justice.

The petitioner is a Christian by birth and born on 23.03.1983 and her parents took her to a place called Tanore, Rajshahi, Bangladesh. She was baptized on 16.07.1994 at Bangladesh Adventist Seminary and College Church and since she was facing severe harassment from her neighbourhood youth and there were lots of threat of her kidnap, she approached the jurisdictional police at Bangladesh and she was advised to keep low profile and that being the case, after discussing her will and wishes, her parents decided to admit her to India for pursuing a career in Nursing and accordingly, she came to India and took admission in Seventh-day Adventist Hospital, Ranchi in 2003 and completed her Diploma in General Nursing and Midwifery in 2006. After completion of the course, she joined a job in reputed hospitals like Wockhardt Hospital and Kidney Institute (Fortis Hospital), Manipal Hospital, Vikram Hospital, Cloud Nine Hospital. In the year 2007-08, she met one Mr.Rajasekaran Krishnamurthy, an Indian citizen and entered into a registered marriage with him in Ranchi on 12.04.2010. After marriage, she moved to Bengaluru in 2010. During her stay in the matrimonial home, she obtained Voters ID Card on 21.07.2012, PAN Card, Aadhar Card and also Indian Passport by providing valid and genuine documents. The authorities issued the above documents after due verification. In April 2019, she applied for Bangladesh Visa for her and her son and during her journey on 20.05.2019, the Immigration Officer at Kolkata illegally detained her and her son at Airport and later she was released from custody. The Regional Passport Office issued a notice for revocation of the passport and that being the case, on 07.11.2019 at 7.30 a.m., all of a sudden, RT Nagar Police arrested her and produced her before the learned Magistrate and she was remanded to police custody till 11.11.2019 and since then, she is in judicial custody.

Decision of the Court

The allegations in the case are that the petitioner has fabricated and manipulated the documents relating to her identity namely Aadhar Card, PAN card and Passport and on the strength of these documents, she has been claiming to be a citizen of India. These allegations require to be established during the trial. Petitioner has taken up a plea that all these documents are lawfully obtained by her after following due procedure and under the said circumstances, in view of the Amendment to the Citizenship Act and there is prima facie material to show that the petitioner has been residing in India since 2002 with her husband and child until the allegations made against the petitioner are established in a full-dressed trial, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, even the applicability of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 may have to be decided before proceeding against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the petitioner requires to be admitted to bail subject to conditions.

  1. Petitioner is directed to be released on bail on obtaining a bond in a sum of Rs.2, 00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
  2. She shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
  3. She shall co-operate in the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
  4. She shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Trial Court without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
  5. She shall mark her attendance on the 1st and 15th of every calendar month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the submission of the final report, whichever is earlier. Thus the petition was allowed.

[googlepdf url=”https://libertatem.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/citizenship-act-case_watermark.pdf” download=”Download Judgement PDF” ]


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -