Karnataka High Court
Kparagume Nzorosa Glody vs State Of Karnataka on 26 March, 2025
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
CRL.P No. 11978 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11978 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. KPARAGUME NZOROSA GLODY,
S/O KPARAGUME ATOLOYO ALEXANDER,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/O NO. 1198, 4TH STAGE,
1ST BLOCK, JUPITER ROAD,
5TH MAIN ROAD, WARD NO. 175,
BDA LAYOUT BDM, BENGALURU CITY,
LAKSHMIPURA CROSS,
NOORJAN GARDEN,
HESARAGHATTA MAIN RAOD,
BENGALURU - 560 097.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PAVAN KUMAR G.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by NANDINI 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
MS
Location: HIGH BY HENNUR P S,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA REP SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA.,HCGP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS)
PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
SPL.C.NO.669/2023 (CR.NO.280/2022 OF HENNUR P.S.,) ON
THE FILE OF XXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR NDPS CASES AT BENGALURU (CCH-
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
CRL.P No. 11978 of 2024
33) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 8(c), 22(c) OF NDPS ACT AND
SEC. 14 OF FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
This is the successive bail application filed under Section
439 of Cr.PC by the accused in Spl.C.No.669/2023, pending
before the Court of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge and Special Judge for NDPS Cases, Bengaluru (CCH-33),
arising out of Crime No.280/2022 registered by Hennur Police
Station, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections
8(c), 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act
(for short 'NDPS Act') and Sections 14 of Foreigners Act,1946.
2. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
3. Based on the credible information received, first
informant along with his staff had raided the alleged spot where
attempt was being made by a person to sell the contraband
article to the public on 15.09.2022 at about 7.30 pm and
petitioner was apprehended from the alleged spot and from his
possession contraband article allegedly MDMA crystal weighing
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
100 gms and brown colour MDMA weighing 150 gms was
recovered and subjected to panchanama. Thereafter, FIR in
Crime No.280/2022 was registered against the petitioner for
the aforesaid offence. After completing investigation, charge
sheet has been filed against him. Bail application filed by the
petitioner in Crl.Mis.No.6656/2024 before the Jurisdictional
Sessions Court was rejected on 13.08.2024. Therefore, he had
approached this Court in Crl.P.No.8842/2023 which was
dismissed on merits by order dated 30.10.2023 passed by this
Court. Petitioner is before this Court in this successive bail
application on the ground that there is a delay in trial.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is in custody from 15.09.2022 and till date, trial in
the case has not commenced. He submits that charges were
framed in the present case on 02.03.2024 and on the same
day, witness summons was also issued. However, till date,
prosecution has not kept any one of the charge sheet witnesses
present before the Court for examination.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
who has opposed the petition, does not dispute the submission
made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents and therefore,
his petition was dismissed earlier. Accordingly, he prays to
dismiss the petition.
6. Petitioner had earlier approached this Court in
Crl.P.No.8842/2023 which was dismissed by this Court by order
dated 30.10.2023 considering the fact that seized contraband
article is of commercial quantity and also petitioner is a person
with criminal antecedents involved in two other similar cases
registered by the very same police station. Petitioner is in
custody in the present case from 15.09.2022.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to
the notice of this Court that, though charges were framed
before Trial Court on 02.03.2024 and witness summons was
also issued on the very same day, till date, prosecution has
failed to keep any one of the charge sheet witnesses present
before the Court for examination.
8. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits
that, the charge sheet witnesses who were summoned by the
Court have not appeared before the Court for administrative
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
reasons and attempts shall be made to secure their presence at
the earliest for the purpose of their examination.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of JAVED
GULAM NABI SHAIKH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND
ANOTHER - 2024 SCC ONLINE SC 1693 at paragraph
No.19, has observed as follows:
"19. If the State or any prosecuting agency
including the Court concerned has no wherewithal to
provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused
to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of
the Constitution then the State or any other
prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail
on the ground that the crime committed is serious.
Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the
nature of the crime."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd
Muslim @ Hussain v/s State (NCT of Delhi) - 2023 SCC
ONLINE SC 352 at paragraph No.21, has observed as follows:
"21. The standard to be considered therefore, is
one, where the court would look at the material in a
broad manner, and reasonably see whether the
accused's guilt may be proved. The judgments of this
court have, therefore, emphasized that the satisfaction
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
which courts are expected to record, i.e., that the
accused may not be guilty, is only prima facie, based
on a reasonable reading, which does not call for
meticulous examination of the materials collected
during investigation (as held in Union of India v.
Rattan Malik19). Grant of bail on ground of undue
delay in trial, cannot be said to be fettered by Section
37 of the Act, given the imperative of Section 436A
which is applicable to offences under the NDPS Act too
(ref. Satender Kumar Antil supra). Having 19 (2009) 2
SCC 624 regard to these factors the court is of the
opinion that in the facts of this case, the appellant
deserves to be enlarged on bail."
11. Petitioner is a foreigner, who is facing multiple
criminal cases registered against him for offences punishable
under NDPS Act. In addition to the offences punishable under
NDPS Act in the present case, he is also charge sheeted for
offences punishable under Foreigners Act.
12. In the present case, petitioner is in custody from
15.09.2022. There is absolutely no progress before the Trial
Court after charges were framed against the petitioner on
02.03.2024. Under such circumstances, without going to the
merits and demerits of the case, petitioner prayer for grant of
regular bail need to be considered in view of the delay in trial.
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
13. In the case of Babul Khan and Another v/s
State of Karnataka - 2020 SCC ONLINE Kar 3438 this
Court has laid down certain guidelines which are required to be
taken into consideration in a case relating to the bail application
of a foreigner. The said guidelines reads as follows:
" (1) As soon as the offence under Foreigners
Act and other Laws is detected and there is a strong
prima facie material to show that the detected person
is a foreign national, and if he has no Passport or Visa,
or if the Visa is expired, and he has no right to stay in
Indian Territory, proceedings shall be immediately
started to deport him to his nation, without un-
necessary delay, from the date of registration of FIR
against such person. (2) The jurisdictional police have
to immediately take steps to inform the concerned
competent authorities to initiate proceedings to deport
such foreign national to his mother country visa-a-vis
other competent authorities also share the details of
such person amongst themselves and concerned
jurisdictional Court.
(3) If the Court refuses to grant bail to those
persons (foreign nationals) in any criminal case, the
Court shall keep such person in regular jail, till the
disposal of the case.
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
(4) If for any reason the Court grants bail
including anticipatory bail, in any criminal case where
the offender is a foreign national, and the offences are
under the Foreigners Act and/or also under any other
Laws for the time being in force, and their Visa is
cancelled or lapsed, or they have no Passport, or they
are illegal migrants, then the Courts shall specifically
order to keep them in detention centers, unless the
competent authority has passed any order
under section 3(2)(a) to (f) of Foreigners Act, 1946, or
till further orders of the court or till they are deported
to their mother country.
(5) If the case registered against the foreign
nationals, ended in conviction, they shall be ordered to
be kept in regular prison of the State till they serve
their sentence, and after serving the sentence, they
shall be kept in detention centers till, they are
deported to their country.
(6) If the case ends up in discharge, release of
the accused or acquittal, and their nationality is in
dispute before the competent Tribunal, they shall be
ordered to be kept in detention centers till they are
deported to their country unless they have any right or
otherwise entitled to remain in India, or the competent
authority has passed any orders under section
3(2)(a) to (e) of Foreigners Act 1946, the acquittal,
discharge or release of the accused is no bar for the
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
concerned competent authorities to question the
nationality of that person before the competent
Tribunal.
(7) The Public Prosecutors, the defence Counsel
and the Courts shall make all their efforts to
expeditiously deal with such cases by giving priority,
for its early disposal, so as to enable other competent
authorities to take appropriate steps under the facts
and circumstances of each case for deportation of such
foreign national (accused) as early as possible. The
Court may also if permissible under law, and
applicable to the facts and circumstances of a case
may invoke sections 265A to 265L under chapter XXI
(A) of Code of Criminal procedure, after following due
procedure. (8) As far as possible where a foreign
national is involved in a case, the courts shall make
their endeavor to record evidence and write the
judgment in English Language, if the accused in such
case is not conversant with the local language. (9) The
Central Government and the State Governments shall
take all necessary steps to establish as many as
necessary Detention Centers, at Cities, Districts and
Taluka places as per the detention Center Manual
referred to in this judgment, with all necessary basic
facilities, as per the detention centre manual, as per
the directions and guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of Upadhyaya Vs State of A.P. and
others reported in (2017)15 SCC 337, so as to keep
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
the foreign nationals, till their deportation whenever
they are ordered to be kept in detention centers by
competent authorities or by the Courts. (10) In case,
the accused/foreign national is a woman or a woman
having a child or the child itself, the competent
authorities, including jail authorities, detention
centers, and the Courts and Juvenile Justice Boards
have to follow the Guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex
Court laid down in Upadhyaya's case noted supra; in
addition to the provisions under the Prisons Act as well
as Prisons Rules, and Juvenile Justice Act and Rules
strictly and meticulously in their letter and spirit.
(11) If a mother who is a foreign national, is in
custody and having infant below the age of six years
or up to six years, the court may order the child to
accompany the mother during her custody. If, either
of parents got arrested, then the custody of the child
may be given to the other parent who is not arrested.
If both the parents are arrested and they are in
custody in same or in some other case, court may
order custody of children to their close relative or to
Government shelter home, or to any other
organization recognized or undertaking of the
government where government or concerned
authorities can monitor the well being of the child, as
per Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015 and Rules.
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
(12) If a foreign national is convicted by the
Court, and any application for parole is made, the jail
authorities have to take in to consideration the
conditions enumerated under Section 4 of the
Foreigners Act, 1946, in addition to the Prisons
Act and Rules.
(13) If a Foreign National is found to be an
illegal migrant and not a citizen of India, and has
been involved in criminal offences under other law of
the land for the time being in force, apart
from Foreigners Act, the State Government or the
Central Government as the case may be, take
immediate necessary steps by exercising their
discretion after applying their mind to the facts and
circumstances of the case, if necessary and if the
circumstances warrants, if the said offences are not
heinous or anti- social, or not punishable with
imprisonment for more than three years, or with fine
only to withdraw those cases under Section 321 of
Cr.PC., so as to enable the concerned authorities to
take necessary steps to deport such persons to their
mother country, as expeditiously as possible.
(14) The State Legal Services Authority, District
Legal services Authorities, and Taluka Legal Services
Committees, shall make a periodical visit to the jails
and Detention centers to ensure and satisfy itself that
the concerned authorities have taken necessary steps
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
to implement the directions issued by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Upadhyay's case and also the Detention
Center Manual, so as to take appropriate action to
inform the concerned authorities to rectify their
mistakes and also the Legal Services Authorities suo-
motu can take steps in accordance with law to get the
mistakes or errors rectified on the legal side.
(15) The Central Government and the respective
State Governments shall often revise the Detention
Center Manual and also the Prisons Act and Rules
based on the need of the hour to bring necessary
changes, so as to effectively and efficiently implement
the very object of such Manual and laws.
(16) The Central Government, the State
Government, the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority, Karnataka Judicial Academy and Police
Academy in the State shall take appropriate necessary
swift action to sensitize all the stake holders, Judges,
Prosecutors, Police Officers, Custom and Immigration
Officers (FRRO-FRO), Jail Authorities and Officers
delegated in Detention Centers, in this regard.
14. Considering the period of incarceration of the
petitioner in custody, I am of the view that without expressing
any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, the prayer
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to be
answered affirmatively. Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime
No.280/2022 registered by Hennur Police Station, Bengaluru,
for offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c) of Narcotic
Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act') and
Sections 14 of Foreigners Act, 1946, subject to the following
conditions:
a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing his
personal bond for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
Lakhs only) with Two sureties for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court.
b) The Trial Court is hereby directed that, at the time of
releasing of the petitioner on bail, the Competent
Authorities shall be informed to detain him in any of the
Detention Centers in Bangalore or at any place nearby
Bengaluru City, till the trial is concluded.
c) It is also made clear that, under Section 3(2) of the
Foreigners Act, if the Competent Authority feels that, by
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:12757
means of imposing restrictions on the movements of the
petitioner by taking bond with or without surety for the
observance or as an alternative to the enforcement of
any of the prescribed or specific restrictions or conditions
can control his movements, such orders may be passed
by the Competent Authority with intimation to the Court.
d) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering or
tampering the prosecution witnesses and he shall be
made available to the court on all the future hearing
dates unless he is exempted by the court for any genuine
reasons or cause.
e) The petitioner however, shall not leave the jurisdiction of
the trial court without prior permission till the case
registered against him is disposed of.
f) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in
future.
g) The petitioner shall furnish his mobile phone number and
also his address proof to the SHO of Hennur Police station
and also to the Trial Court.
SD/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
SPV
