Delhi High Court
Ruma Bibi vs State & Ors on 3 June, 2021
$~S-25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 03rd June, 2021
+ W.P. (CRL) 902/2020
RUMA BIBI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Verma with Ms. Mehak
Nakra, Advocates.
versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel
(Criminal) alongwith Ms. Suman
Nalwa, DCP (Special Branch).
Mr. Amit Mahajan CGSC with Mr.
Dhruv Pande, Advocate for
Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate as
Amicus Curiae with Ms. Manvi Priya,
Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Mr. Sukrit Seth
and Mr. Sanjeevi Seshadri Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
JUDGMENT
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J. (ORAL)
The present matter has been taken-up for hearing by way of video-
conferencing on account of COVID-19 pandemic.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed
by:DURGESH NANDAN
Signing Date:05.06.2021
18:15:56
CRL.M.A. 8308/2021 (Seeking Directions For Release Of Petitioner's
Husband)
By judgment dated 08.04.2021, this court had directed the immediate
release of the petitioner's husband, who was until then being detained at the
Sewa Sadan Deportation Centre, Lampur Village, Narela, Delhi.
The crux of the directions for the husband's release are found in the
following paragraphs of judgment dated 08.04.2021.
"10. In the circumstances, the present habeas corpus petition is allowed
and Asif Hossain is directed to be released from 'Sewa Sadan Deportation
Centre' Narela, Lampur Village, Delhi forthwith. However, in view of the
submissions made on behalf of official respondents, Asif Hossain son of
Badar Hossain, resident of Akra Krishna Nagar, Purba Para, Akra Station
Road, P.S.: Maheshtala, District South 24 Parganas, Batanagar, West
Bengal is directed to participate in any proceedings that may be instituted
by the official respondents under the Foreigners Act or otherwise, in
accordance with law, if and when required.
11. The process and/or notice to be issued by the official respondents in the
event they proceed to take any further action against Asif Hossain shall be
deemed to have been served if received at his residential address recorded
hereinabove. The proof of residential address stated before this court shall
be furnished by Asif Hossain to the SHO of the concerned police station
forthwith. He also undertakes to appear before the competent authority as
and when a show cause notice is received by him from the official
respondents, in accordance with law."
(emphasis supplied)
It would appear however, that despite the aforesaid directions, the
petitioner's husband was not released from detention until late May 2021,
which impelled the petitioner to file an application dated 25.05.2021 bearing
CRL.M.A. 8308/2021, seeking compliance of the aforesaid directions by the
State respondents.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed
by:DURGESH NANDAN
Signing Date:05.06.2021
18:15:56
The application came-up before this court on 28.05.2021; and
thereafter, in evident haste, the State respondents released the petitioner's
husband from the Lampur Deportation Centre on 31.05.2021. It however
transpired that in release order dated 31.05.2021 issued to the petitioner's
husband, a condition was imposed by the issuing authority to the effect that
the petitioner's husband would have to report once-a-week to the local Police
Station in West Bengal within the jurisdiction of which he proposed to reside.
A copy of the release order has been screen-shared with the court in the course
of today's hearing.
In view of the foregoing actions from the State respondents, we called
upon Mr. Sanjay Lao, learned Standing Counsel (Criminal) appearing on
behalf of respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4 (State of NCT of Delhi and
Commissioner of Police, Delhi and Director General of Prisons, Delhi) and
Mr. Amit Mahajan, learned CGSC appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2
(Union of India) to explain the incorporation of the condition on the release
of the petitioner's husband, as mentioned above.
Prima facie, this court was of the view that the incorporation of the
condition in the release order, requiring the petitioner's husband to report
weekly to the local Police Station in West Bengal amounted to modification
of judgment dated 08.04.2021, whereby this court had directed his
unconditional release; while at the same time implicitly giving liberty to the
competent authority to proceed against the petitioner's husband under the
Foreigners Act, if they so decided, in accordance with law, by issuing to him
the requisite show cause notice.
Today, Ms. Suman Nalwa, DCP (Special Branch), New Delhi has
joined the video-conference hearing and has explained in some detail that the
condition for the petitioner's husband to mark his presence at the local Police
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed
by:DURGESH NANDAN
Signing Date:05.06.2021
18:15:56
Station in West Bengal came to be incorporated in his release order by
inadvertence and innocent error; that there was no intention whatsoever to
modify the directions issued by this court in its judgment dated 08.04.2021;
and that such condition would, if deemed necessary, be imposed upon the
petitioner's husband only after a show cause notice is issued to him in
proceedings under the Foreigners Act as per liberty granted by this court in
its judgment, in accordance with law.
In light of what is stated by the DCP (Special Branch), Mr. Sanjay Lao
submits that the explanation offered by the DCP be accepted and further
proceedings in the matter be closed, reserving liberty to the competent
authority to proceed against the petitioner's husband, if so advised, under the
Foreigners Act, in accordance with law. On instructions of the DCP (Special
Branch), Mr. Lao also submits, that the condition appearing in release order
dated 31.05.2021, namely " ... this order is subjected to the conditions that he
(Asif Hussain) will himself report to Station House Officer (SHO) of local
police station once in a week ... " be treated as deleted.
Upon an overall conspectus of the circumstances of the case and upon
considering the explanation offered by the DCP (Special Branch), we believe
that the condition came to be incorporated in the release order by
inadvertence, or at worst by oversight and misunderstanding of the directions
contained in judgment dated 08.04.2021.
Mr. Ajay Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
also fairly submits that the aforesaid position is acceptable to the petitioner;
and that the present application may be disposed of in the above terms.
Accordingly, we accept the explanation offered by the DCP (Special
Branch), recording Mr. Lao's statement that the afore-extracted portion of
release order dated 31.05.2021 shall be treated as deleted.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed
by:DURGESH NANDAN
Signing Date:05.06.2021
18:15:56
In the aforesaid terms, we close the matter at this point.
Needless to add that both the petitioner as well as the State respondents
shall be bound by the directions contained in judgment dated 08.04.2021.
We appreciate the fair and forthright stand taken by Ms. Suman Nalwa,
DCP (Special Branch) before this court.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
JUNE 3, 2021/ds/uj
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed
by:DURGESH NANDAN
Signing Date:05.06.2021
18:15:56
