[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
Sri Hawal Das Alias Habul Das vs State Of Tripura on 19 January, 2026
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl. A(J) 89 of 2025
1. Sri Hawal Das alias Habul Das, aged 48 years,
son of Harndo Das;
2. Smt. Sumitra Das, aged 45 years,
wife of Sri Hawal Das alias Habul Das along with 6 years old son
Master Bhumi Das
-both are resident of Thanaghrai,P.S. Darai,
Chandpur, District: Sunamganj, Bangladesh
(Now suffering rigorous imprisonment in District Jail, Kailashahar,
District: Unakoti, Tripura
......Convicts-Appellants
Versus
State of Tripura
.......Respondent
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. D.K. Das Chaudhury, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. P.P.
Date of hearing & delivery
of Judgment & order : 19.01.2026.
Whether fit for reporting : No ____________
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)
[1] Heard Mr. D.K. Das Chaudhury, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants. Also heard Mr. R. Saha, learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State-
respondent.
[2] This present appeal is filed under Section 415(2) read with Section
424 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNSS, 2023),
against the judgment and order dated 01.11.2025 passed in case No. ST (Type-
2) 17 of 2025 by learned Sessions Judge, District- Unakoti, Kailashahar,
Tripura convicting the appellants under section 3, Rule 6(a) Passport (Entry into
India) Act, 1920 and Section 14A(a)(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and
sentencing each of them to fine of Rs. 5000/- for commission of the offence
under Section 3, Rule 6(a) of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, in
default to suffer SI for one month, and rigorous imprisonment for two years and
fine of Rs. 10,000/- only in default to suffer SI for two months for commission
of the offence under Section 14A(a)(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
[3] By filing the present appeal, the appellants have sought for the
following reliefs:
(i) Admit the appeal,
(ii) Notice the respondent;
(iii) Call for the trial Court records,
(iv) After hearing set aside, the impugned judgment and orders of
conviction and sentences and acquit the appellant from the charges leveled
against him, in the alternative,
(v) The appellants may kindly be released reducing the term of sentence
to the period of sentence already suffered;
(vi) The gold and silver ornament and the mobile phones recovered from
the appellants may kindly be returned to them, if the appellants are released
by the order of Hon'ble High Court;.................."
[4] It is the case of the appellants that in pursuance of the order in
criminal proceedings the appellants suffered imprisonment since 28.02.2025 to
till day and they only travelled without any proper documents from Bangladesh
to India in order to save their lives along with the family members. It is
contended that the present situation in Bangladesh is vulnerable wherein the
safety and security of the minorities are in stake and to save their lives they are
compelled to leave Bangladesh facing communal torture. It is also contended
that the entire family of the appellant No.1 is disturbed and whereabouts of his
wife and the minor daughter in Tripura also needs to be located. However, as
per the version of the State, they are in safe homes under their custody and once
the appellants are released, they all would be sent back to their country.
[5] It is brought to the notice of this Court that by a letter dated
07.01.2026 the Under Secretary to the Government of Tripura informed Mr.
Rajib Saha, learned Addl. P.P. that the Department does not have any objection
if this Court directs to push back the convict persons to their own country i.e.
Bangladesh instead of keeping them in jail to suffer imprisonment. The said
letter has been perused and the same is kept on record.
[6] Upon hearing the submissions made at the Bar and on perusal of
record, this Court is of the opinion that since there is no antecedence against the
appellants and considering that in order to protect their minor children and the
family members the appellants have entered into Indian boundary, a lenient
view may be taken considering this as the first offence in view of the prevailing
situation in Bangladesh. Thus, this Court considers that the punishment
imposed in the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court dated
01.11.2025 passed in case No. ST (Type-2) 17 of 2025 should be modified to
the extent the appellants herein have undergone in custody from the date of
their arrest to till date and accordingly, the same is ordered. All necessary steps
be taken by the State respondent to push-back the appellants alongwith their
family members as per procedure.
[7] It is also ordered that the appellant No.1 shall continue to be in
prison not as convict and the prisoner authority shall act as a custodian for him
and the family members including the appellant No.2 shall continue to in the
custody of the State until they are repatriated to their own country. As and when
the respondents take steps for push back, they shall be released as per
procedure.
[8] It is needless to observe that at the time of push back whatever the
belongings of the appellants were seized by the concerned respondents
authority, the same be handed over under proper acknowledgement following
all necessary procedures.
[9] With the above observations and directions, the instant appeal is
disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall
also stand closed.
[10] Send down the LCR.
DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
Sabyasachi G.
SABYASACHI GHOSH GHOSH
Date: 2026.01.20 13:56:19 +05'30'
