The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to a Bangladeshi woman who was staying in India illegally on the basis of forged documents.
A Single Bench of Justice Rajeev Misra passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Smt Hina Rizwan.
The application for bail has been filed by applicant Smt Hina Rizwan seeking her enlargement on bail in Case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946, Police Station-Moolganj, District-Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial i.e Criminal Case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946, now pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate (IInd), District Kanpur Nagar.
The Court noted that,
Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 11.12.2022, a prompt FIR dated 11.12.2022 was lodged by first informant-Anoop Singh and was registered as Case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946, Police Station-Moolganj, District-Kanpur Nagar.
In the aforesaid FIR, 5 persons namely Rizwan Mohammad, Hina Rizwan, Ruksana Rizwan, Khalid Majid and Arsalan Mohammad have been nominated as named accused.
The gravamen of the allegations made in the FIR is to the effect that named accused Rizwan Mohammad, who is a Bangladeshi national had solemnized marriage (nikah) with the applicant Hina Rizwan and is staying in India illegally on the basis of forged documents.
After the aforementioned F.I.R was lodged, the Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of the concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII CrPC.
On the basis of material collected by the Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that not only the complicity of the named accused but also the complicity of not named accused- namely Mohd Adib, Mannu Rehman, Irfan Solanki and Rizwan Mohammad is also established in the crime in question.
He, accordingly, submitted the police report (charge sheet) dated 24.4.2023 in terms of Section 173 (2) CrPC, whereby named accused and aforementioned not named accused have been charge sheeted under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and Section 13 read with Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946.
“Having heard the Senior Counsel for applicant, the Additional Advocate General for State, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made, complicity of accused and coupled with the fact that though applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused, applicant is a foreign national, inasmuch as she has been granted Bangladeshi citizenship, though applicant was brought up in India, her issues were born in Bangladesh out of wedlock of Rizwan Mohammad a Bangladeshi national, her marriage was solemnized in India, the applicant had returned from Bangladesh in the year 2016 and overstayed i.e beyond the period mentioned in the visa granted by the Government of Bangladesh, yet irrespective of aforesaid clinching facts, the Court finds that the issues of the applicant namely Ruksana Rizawan, Khalid Majid, Arsalan Mohammad and Mohammad Adib have already been enlarged on bail by Trial Court, the applicant is a lady and therefore she is entitled to the benefit of the provision contained in proviso to Section 437 CrPC, the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, the police report in terms of Section 173 (2) CrPC has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized, there is no such distinguishing feature in the case of the applicant from bailed out co-accused Ruksana Rizwan, Khalid Majid, Arsalan Mohammad and Mohammad Adib so as to deny her bail, the offence complained of is triable by Magistrate and also the fact that since the children have been enlarged on bail, three children of applicant are unmarried young girls and the parents being in custody, equity demands that the mother should be released on bail, therefore, irrespective of the objections raised by the Additional Advocate General in opposition to the application for bail, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail”, the Court observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant Smt Hina Rizwan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under section 229-A I.P.C.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C, may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavours and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.