Facts
The petitioner, a foreign national, filed an application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, in connection with Daragha Bazar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2025
Source reference: p.1The petitioner is accused of abetting the suicide of the deceased by blackmailing her for money following a relationship
Source reference: p.2Procedurally, the Investigation Officer (IO) submitted a charge sheet alleging that the petitioner had been overstaying in India since April 2020 without valid documents and had forged his passport and visa
Source reference: p.1, 4The petitioner contended that the allegations were concocted and that the SIM card used for the alleged blackmail was not recovered from him
Source reference: p.2The State and Informant opposed bail, citing a suicide note naming the petitioner and evidence from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) indicating the petitioner’s visa was forged and belonged to another individual
Source reference: p.3, 5Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the gravity of the offenses and his status as a foreign national with allegedly forged travel documents
Source reference: p.4-5Law Applied
The court primarily considered Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant bail
Source reference: p.1It applied provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Sections 108 (Abetment), 318(4) (Cheating), and 336 (Forgery)
Source reference: p.1Furthermore, the court relied on Section 67/67-A of the IT Act regarding electronic blackmail, and Sections 12(1)(d) and 12(1)(a) of the Passports Act, 1967, alongside Sections 22 and 23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, concerning the illegal stay and use of forged documents by foreign nationals
Source reference: p.2, 3Reasoning
The court weighed the nature and gravity of the accusations against the petitioner’s plea for liberty.
Source reference: no citationIt observed that the deceased’s suicide note specifically mentioned a SIM number that was subsequently tracked and recovered from the petitioner
Source reference: p.4The court found significant weight in the IO's report, supported by the FRRO Hyderabad, which confirmed that the petitioner’s Visa (No. VJ5038102) was a forged document belonging to another foreigner
Source reference: p.4-5The court reasoned that the petitioner’s conduct—specifically overstaying in India since 2020 through impersonation and forgery—indicated a high risk of absconding
Source reference: p.3-4It determined that the prima facie involvement in abetment of suicide, coupled with the lack of valid travel documents, made it "hazardous" to grant bail as there was no guarantee the petitioner would appear for trial
Source reference: p.3-4Holding
The court answered the issue in the negative and rejected the bail application
It held that given the gravity of the offenses, the evidence of forgery, and the petitioner's status as an illegal immigrant, bail could not be granted
Source reference: p.4-5The application (BLAPL) was disposed of with a direction to transmit the order to the concerned trial court
Source reference: p.5Original Court PDF
DJEDJE RAYMOND @ CHIJOKE OKOYEvsSTATE OF ODISHA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in