Mumbai, February 3, 2024 – The Sessions Court of Greater Bombay, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge S.N. Patil, has granted bail to two women accused of illegally residing in India without valid documentation. The case, which involved Smt. Kajal Junab Shaikh (33) and Smt. Rani Begum Yarul Shaikh (35), was registered under the provisions of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1950, and the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Background of the Case
The case originated when the Bandra Police, acting on secret information, apprehended the two women on Hill Road, Bandra. Upon inquiry, it was alleged that the women were Bangladeshi nationals who had been living in Mumbai illegally without any valid documents. The police confiscated their mobile phones and discovered that the accused had been in contact with individuals residing in Bangladesh, further fueling suspicions about their immigration status.
Following their arrest, Crime No. 1947/2023 was registered against them at Bandra Police Station, citing violations under:
- Section 3 and 6 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1950
- Section 3(1) of the Foreigners Order, 1948
- Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946
Defense Arguments for Bail
Advocate Mohd. Aslam, representing the accused, argued that the women were Indian citizens residing in Kharghar, Navi Mumbai. He contended that the prosecution had no concrete proof of their Bangladeshi origin and that the accused had cooperated fully with the investigation. Additionally, he highlighted that both women were suffering from health issues and that prolonged detention would be detrimental to their well-being.
The defense also relied on a precedent set in the case of Aayesha Siddhika Salim Mulla & Others vs. State of Maharashtra, wherein the Bombay High Court ruled in favor of bail under similar circumstances.
Prosecution’s Opposition to Bail
The Additional Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.), Mrs. Ashwini Rayakar, strongly opposed the bail plea, arguing that:
- The accused were not permanent residents of Mumbai.
- They had no valid documents to prove Indian citizenship.
- If released, they could tamper with prosecution evidence and become untraceable, thereby obstructing the judicial process.
Court’s Observations and Verdict
After hearing both sides, Judge Patil noted the gravity of the allegations but also acknowledged that the accused had been in custody since December 9, 2023. The court observed that while the accusations were serious, there was insufficient material to deny bail, especially considering that the investigation had been completed and the accused had cooperated with authorities.
The court, however, imposed strict conditions to ensure compliance and prevent any possibility of the accused absconding. The bail conditions included:
- The accused must furnish a personal bond of ₹25,000 each, along with one or more solvent sureties of the same amount.
- They must report to the Bandra Police Station on the 1st and 15th of every month between 10:00 AM and 1:00 PM.
- They must not tamper with evidence or contact prosecution witnesses.
- They are required to submit their detailed residential address upon release and must inform the investigating officer if they change their residence.
- The accused must not leave India without prior court permission.
- No provisional cash bail was allowed.
Legal and Social Implications
This case brings attention to the broader issue of undocumented immigrants in Mumbai and the legal challenges in proving nationality in the absence of proper documentation. While the police maintain vigilance against illegal immigration, the defense’s argument raises questions about due process and the burden of proof in such cases.
With their release, the accused will now await trial while adhering to the conditions set by the court. The case is likely to set a precedent for similar legal battles in the future, as courts navigate the complexities of immigration laws and fundamental human rights.
Stay updated with more legal and crime-related news from Mumbai.