Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Kallol Barua & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal on 24 February, 2023
Form No. J(1).
Item No.10
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(APPELLATE SIDE)
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH
CRA(SB) 138 of 2022
Kallol Barua & Ors.
VERSUS
The State of West Bengal
Appearance:-
Mr. Dipanjan Dutt
Mr. Surojit Saha
.... For the Appellants
Mr. Imran Ali
Mrs. Debjani Sahu ..... For the State
Heard On : 28.09.2022, 10.11.2022, 21.11.2022, 13.12.2022,
10.01.2023, 23.02.2023.
Judgment On : 24.02.2023
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.:-
The present appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment and order of
conviction and sentence dated 17.08.2022 passed by the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Sessions Case No.294 of
2022 wherein the appellants on pleading guilty in respect of the offences/charges under
Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for two months.
2
The present case being Madhyamgram Police Station Case No.148/22 dated
22.03.2022
was registered for investigation on the basis of a complaint filed by Dipankar
Singha Roy, Sub-Inspector of Police, Madhyamgram Police Station. The complainant on
receipt of such information lodged Madhyamgram P.S. GDE No.2976 dated 22.03.2022 and
left with force to work out on the said information, that some nationals of Bangladesh
infiltrated in India without any valid passport and visa and took shelter at a house in
Digberia, Mollapara with ulterior motive. The six accused persons were apprehended at
about 20.55 hours at a house named "ABASAN". The accused persons who were
apprehended being (i) Kallol Barua (38 years) s/o Amiya Barua of Vill - Noapara Rawjan,
PS - Rawjan, Dist - Chattagram, Bangladesh, (ii) Rigen Barua (20 yrs) S/o Rupen Barua of
Vill - Adharmanik, Rawjan, PS- Rawjan, Dist- Chattagram, Bangladesh, (iii) Bikash Barua
(22 Yrs) S/o Arun Barua of Vill - Ukia Shailer Doba, PS - Ukia, Dist - Cux Bazar,
Chattagram, Bangladesh, (iv) Amal Barua (32 yrs) S/o Sanjit Barua of Vil- Ukia Pata Bari,
PS- Ukia, Dist. - Cux Bvazar, Chattagram, Bangladesh, (v) Litan Barua (26yrs) S/o Sri Kanu
Barua of Vill - Ukia Shailer Doba, PS- Ukia, Dist - Cux Bazar, Bangladesh, (vi) Joy Barua (26
Years) S/o Dipak Barua of Vill - Noapara, Rawjan, PS - Rawjan, District - Chattagram,
Bangladesh disclosed their identities as Bangladesh Nationals and accepted that they
entered Indo Bangladesh Border illegally without having any passport and visa with the aid
of touts. Accordingly, they were arrested and the case was registered for investigation.
The accused persons/appellants were charge-sheeted under Section 14A(b) of the
Foreigners Act. The appellants thereafter filed an application on 17.08.2022 expressing their
intention before the learned Court for pleading guilty in respect of the charges levelled
against them. The learned Trial Court being the learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court, Barasat, on perusal of the charge-sheet and the documents
relied upon by the Investigating Officer of the case to prove the charges was of the opinion
that a case under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act were made out against them and,
accordingly, read out the contents of the charges in Bengali when the accused
persons/appellants pleaded guilty by saying that "Ami Doshi". The learned Trial Court
accepted such plea of guilt and sentenced them as referred to above.
Mr. Dutt, learned advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the sentence
so imposed upon the appellants may be considered in view of the conduct before the
learned Trial Court. Accepting such position of law with regard to the relevant provisions
and the limited scope of appeal in cases where the accused persons/appellants pleaded
guilty, learned advocate made an attempt by referring to Section 265A of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
Mr. Ali, learned advocate appearing for the State supported the judgment and
order of conviction and sentence so imposed by the learned Trial Court and submitted that
the accused persons/appellants were made to understand the charges in the language, they
could follow and after understanding the same they only pleaded guilty. Having regard to
the nature and gravity of the offence where the accused persons/appellants were able to
cross the Indo Bangladesh Border without any valid documents according to him no
unnecessary leniency should be favoured to them. It was submitted that there is no scope
for interference in the judgment and order of conviction and sentence so far as the
contentions raised by the leaned advocate appearing for the appellants both the Sub-
Sections 'a' and 'b' of Section 265A are not applicable to the present case in view of the fact
that Section 14A(b) do prescribe punishment which may extend to a period of eight years.
Having considered the submissions of the learned advocate appearing for the
appellants and the facts of the case particularly, the place from where all the six appellants
were apprehended and subsequently arrested, I am of the view that Section 14A(b) which
prescribes:-
"Whoever-
(a) .....
(b) enters into or stays in any area in India without the valid documents required for such
entry or for such stay, as the case may be, under the provisions of any order made under
this Act or any direction given in pursuance thereof,
shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years, but
may extend to eight years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten
thousand rupees but may extend to fifty thousand rupees; and if he has entered into a bond
in pursuance of clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 3, his bond shall be forfeited, and any
person bound thereby shall pay the penalty thereof, or show cause to the satisfaction of the
convicting court why such penalty should not be paid by him."
The sentence so imposed by the learned Trial Court are minimum in both respects
that is two years which is the minimum sentence and Rs.10,000/- which is the minimum
amount of fine. As such, there is no scope for interference with the judgment and order of
conviction and sentence so passed by the learned Trial Court.
Accordingly, no interference is called for both in respect of the fine and sentence so
imposed by the learned Trial Court.
Thus, CRA (SB) 138 of 2022 is dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.
Department is directed to send back the Lower Court Records to the respective
Courts below.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the
parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.
(TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.)
K.S., Bpg A.R. (Ct.)
