01Facts
The appellant, a Bangladeshi national, was arrested with ten others in Tiruppur on 28 January 2025.
p. 2The prosecution alleged that he had entered and remained in India without a valid passport, visa, or other travel document.
p. 2The trial court convicted him under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and sentenced him to two years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000, with three months’ simple imprisonment in default of payment.
p. 2 · p. 4On appeal under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, the appellant did not challenge the finding of guilt and sought reduction of sentence, submitting that he had been in custody since January 2025.
p. 4He had stated at trial that his family lived in Bangladesh and that he would return there.
p. 502Issues
i.Whether the sentence imposed on the appellant, who did not challenge his conviction and sought reduction of sentence, warranted appellate interference.
p. 4 · p. 5ii.Whether the default sentence for non-payment of the fine should be reduced and directions for the appellant’s deportation should be issued.
pp. 5–603Law Applied
The conviction was under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, for which the trial court imposed a two-year term of imprisonment and a fine; the High Court treated the imprisonment term as the statutory minimum.
p. 2 · p. 5The appeal was brought under Section 415(2) of the BNSS.
p. 1In relation to deportation, the Court referred to M/s. Maja Daruwala and another v. State of West Bengal, 2025 Law Finder SC 4783, and directed the authorities to act consistently with the observations in that decision.
p. 6Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415Section 258
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 207
04Reasoning
The Court found that the prosecution had established the appellant’s Bangladeshi nationality and his entry into India without valid documents, relying, among other matters, on his birth certificate and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses; the appellant did not challenge the finding of guilt.
p. 5It held that the trial court had imposed the minimum imprisonment term and found no infirmity warranting a reduction of that term or the fine.
p. 5However, considering the circumstances, it reduced the default imprisonment for non-payment of the fine from three months to three days.
pp. 5–6The appellant’s stated intention to return to Bangladesh informed the direction concerning deportation.
pp. 5–605Holding
The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction, two-year term of rigorous imprisonment, and ₹10,000 fine were upheld.
p. 6The default sentence was reduced to three days’ simple imprisonment.
p. 6The authorities were directed to take appropriate action to ensure the appellant’s deportation to Bangladesh within 30 days after he had undergone his sentence.
p. 6Original Court PDF
MD Imran ShekvsThe State rep. by, The Inspector of Police
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
