Shamshudhwaha Ulliulaha Buaiya vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 7244 Bom

                                                                            (905)WPNo.38772016(1)

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                           
                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE

                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3877 OF 2016




                                                                   
    Shamshudhwaha Ulliulaha Buaiya       ...    Petitioner
          V/s.




                                                                  
    The State of Maharashtra             ...    Respondent
                                  .....

None for the Appellant.

Mr.H.J.Dedia, APP for the Respondent/State.

....

ig CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI & A. M. BADAR JJ.

DATED : 15th DECEMBER 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER V.K.TAHILRAMAJI J.) 1 It is the case of the petitioner that he is a citizen of

Bangladesh. The petitioner by Judgment and Order dated 05/12/2015

has been convicted by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai in C.C.No.1108/PW/2015. By the said

Judgment and Order, he has been convicted under section 14(a) of the

Foreigners Act, 1946 and sentenced to suffer three years imprisonment

and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- in default to suffer imprisonment of six

months. The prayer of the petitioner is that the sentence be reduced

and he be sent back to Bangladesh.

    Gaikwad RD                                                                                      1/2





                                                                   (905)WPNo.38772016(1)

    2                  The   Constitution   Bench   of   the   Supreme   Court   in




                                                                                  

Thansingh Nathmal Vs. Superintendent of Taxes, Dhubri AIR 1964

SC 1419, has held that when alternate efficacious remedy is available, a

writ petition should not be entertained. Against the Judgment and

Order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner has remedy of

preferring an appeal before the Sessions Court, hence we are not

inclined to directly consider the prayer of the petitioner.

In this view of the matter, office to send these papers to the

concerned Sessions Court. The Sessions Court to treat this petition as

an appeal and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible after

appointing an advocate from the legal aid panel who will represent the

petitioner/appellant in his appeal.

4. Office to communicate this order to the petitioner who is in

Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik.

    (A. M. BADAR J.)                    (SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI J.)




    Gaikwad RD                                                                             2/2