Mumbai, February 3, 2024 – The Additional Sessions Judge S.N. Patil, presiding over Court No. 17 at the City Civil and Sessions Court, has granted bail to two women, Kajal Junab Shaikh (33) and Rani Begum Yarul Shaikh (35), accused of staying in India illegally. The women, who were arrested on December 9, 2023, by Bandra police, are facing charges under multiple sections of Indian immigration laws, including the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1950, and the Foreigners Act, 1946. The case has drawn significant attention due to its implications for immigration and border security.
Background of the Case
The two accused women were arrested after being found to be residing in Mumbai illegally. According to the prosecution, the police acted on secret information received regarding their presence at Hill Road, Bandra. Upon inquiry, it was revealed that both women were Bangladeshi nationals and lacked any official documentation proving their legal residence in India.
Additionally, police reportedly seized their mobile phones and discovered that they had been in regular communication with relatives residing in Bangladesh, raising suspicions regarding their illegal status and activities in the country.
Based on this information, a case was registered under Crime No. 1947/2023 at Bandra Police Station, with the charges being violations of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1950, the Foreigners Order, 1948, and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Defense’s Argument for Bail
The defense counsel for the applicants, led by Advocate Mohd. Aslam, argued strongly for their release on bail. They highlighted several factors, including the fact that both women were suffering from health issues and had cooperated fully with the police during their custody. The defense also stressed that the accused women were residents of West Bengal and had been residing in Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, where they were reportedly settled.
Advocate Aslam also pointed out that there was no evidence connecting the accused to any illegal activities beyond their immigration status. In light of this, he contended that the accused were entitled to bail under Section 439(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), as there was no need for further custodial interrogation, with the investigation already being nearly completed.
The defense team also referenced a previous bail ruling by the Bombay High Court in 2023, in a similar case involving the violation of immigration laws, suggesting that the legal principles in that case should apply here as well.
Prosecution’s Opposition to Bail
On the other hand, the prosecution, represented by Assistant Public Prosecutor Mrs. Ashwini Rayakar, opposed the bail application. The prosecution argued that the accused were not permanent residents of Mumbai and had no valid documents to prove their legal status in India. Mrs. Rayakar expressed concern that if released, the applicants might tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, or flee the country.
The prosecution also emphasized the gravity of the charges, stating that the applicants were foreign nationals who had violated Indian immigration laws and posed a risk to national security. The prosecution called for strict monitoring and opposed the applicants’ release on bail, highlighting the possibility of them absconding or disrupting the investigation.
Court’s Ruling and Conditions for Bail
After carefully considering the arguments presented by both the defense and the prosecution, Judge Patil ruled in favor of granting bail to the two women. In his judgment, the court acknowledged that although the applicants were accused of violating immigration laws, they had fully cooperated with the police and the investigation was nearly complete. The court also noted that the custodial interrogation of the accused was no longer necessary.
In granting bail, Judge Patil imposed several stringent conditions to ensure that the accused do not tamper with evidence or flee justice. The conditions for bail are as follows:
- Bail Bond: The applicants must each furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000, along with one or more solvent sureties of the same amount.
- Conditions of Supervision: The applicants are required to attend the Bandra Police Station on the 1st and 15th of each month between 10:00 AM and 1:00 PM. They must cooperate with the investigating officer as needed.
- Address Verification: The applicants must provide their detailed address to the court at the time of furnishing the bail bond, and inform the investigating officer of any changes to their address.
- No Tampering with Evidence: The applicants are prohibited from tampering with the evidence or attempting to influence the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
- International Travel Restriction: The applicants cannot leave India without prior permission from the court.
- No Provisional Cash Bail: No provisional cash bail was allowed as part of the decision.
The court concluded that with these conditions in place, the risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice would be minimized.
Public Reaction and Legal Implications
This decision has sparked mixed reactions, especially concerning immigration enforcement and the treatment of foreign nationals residing in India without valid documents. Legal experts suggest that while the court’s ruling was in line with established legal precedents for such cases, it underscores the need for careful scrutiny in cases involving foreign nationals, particularly regarding national security.
This case raises important questions about the increasing number of foreign nationals residing illegally in India and the measures needed to regulate their presence. Additionally, it highlights the challenges authorities face in enforcing immigration laws effectively, especially when individuals engage in long-term stay without the necessary documentation.
Looking Ahead
The two accused women, Kajal Junab Shaikh and Rani Begum Yarul Shaikh, are expected to continue facing legal proceedings. The bail order provides temporary relief, but the broader implications of the case on India’s immigration policy and border security remain a topic of ongoing debate. The case will likely continue to unfold as the authorities investigate the applicants’ claims of being Indian citizens and their alleged connections to Bangladesh.
