Criminal Petition No. 14038 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14038 OF 2024 BETWEEN: EREMHEN SMART S/O EREMHEN AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT NO.4, IST FLOOR MS RAMAIAH LAYOUT AVALAHALLI, SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST, YALAHANKA, BANGALORE - 560 064. (BY SRI M.R. BALAKRISHNA, ADV.) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SAMPIGEHALLI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BANGALORE - 560 001. …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.P.C (U/S 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ORDER FOR HIS RELEASE ON REGULAR BAIL IN SPLC..NO.2238/2024 AROSE OUT OF CR.NO.272/2024, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 8(C),22(c) OF NDPS ACT, 1985, U/S 14 OF FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946, REGISTERED BY THE SAMPIGEHALLI P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF 35th CITY JUDGE FOR NDPS CASES AT CIVIL AND SESSIONS BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Accused No.2 in Spl.CC.No.2238/2024 pending before the Court of XXXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.272/2024 registered by Sampigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail. 2.
Facts
Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. FIR in Crime No.272/2024 was registered by Sampigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the aforesaid offences against Emeka James Iwoba and others based on the first information dated 12.05.2024 received from M L Subramanya Swamy, Police Officer attached to Sampigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 12.05.2025 and subsequently, remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been filed against four persons and petitioner is arraigned - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 as accused No.2 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.5930/2024 was rejected on 30.07.2024. Therefore, he is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Investigation Officer has not served the grounds of arrest on the petitioner and therefore, in view of the law laid down by this Court in Crl.P.No.11096/2024 and connected matters disposed of on 13.12.2024, petitioner has to be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP, who has opposed the petition submits that petitioner has not only involved in a case punishable under the provisions of NDPS Act but he also has no valid documents to stay in India. She, however, does not dispute that grounds of arrest was not served on the petitioner at the time of his arrest. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of PANKAJ BANSAL VS UNION OF INDIA - (2024) 7 SCC 576 and PRABIR PURKAYASTHA VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) - (2024) 8 SCC 254, has categorically held that grounds of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 arrest needs to be served in writing immediately after his arrest conveying to the arrested accused, so as to provide an opportunity of defending himself against custodial remand and to seek bail. Non-compliance of the same, entitles the accused to seek bail. 7. In the present case, learned HCGP has fairly submitted that grounds of arrest was not served on the petitioner at the time of his arrest and therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases referred above, petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively. However, the fact remains that petitioner is a foreigner and he has no valid documents as on this date to stay in India. 8.
Legal Reasoning
The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of BABUL KHAN AND ANOTHER VS STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER - 2020 SCC OnLine KAR 3438 has laid down certain guidelines to be followed by the State Authorities and the Courts while considering the bail application of the foreign nationals. The relevant guidelines which would be material to the case on hand as found in para No.113 reads as under : - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 “(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 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 acquittal, discharge or release of the accused is no bar for the 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.” 9. In the said case, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has observed that in the event the Court comes to the conclusion that the accused who is a foreign national, has made out a prima facie case for enlarging him on bail, the accused shall be directed to be detained in a detention center till the trial in the case is concluded. 10. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail needs to - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 be answered affirmatively, subject to appropriate conditions. Accordingly, the following order:- 11. The petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.CC.No.2238/2024 pending before the Court of XXXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.272/2024 registered by Sampigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional 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 Centres in Bengaluru 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 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15460 CRL.P No. 14038 of 2024 feels that by 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 appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons; e) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; f) The petitioner however, shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission till the case registered against him is
Decision
disposed of; g) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in future. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN