CRL A/17/2026 of MOHAMED MUSA ALI PADA Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police on 28 September 2026

COMMON JUDGMENT

On 03.09.2026, this Court passed the following order:- Crl A. No.17 of 2026 filed by accused 1 & 3 in SC No.151 of 2025. Crl A. No.497 of 2026 filed by second accused in SC No.151 of 2025. Both appeals arise out of the same session case. Hence both taken together and disposed.

2. The Trial Court in SC No.151 of 2025 by judgment dated 14.10.2025 convicted the accused 1 to 3 for offences punishable under Section 14(A)(b) of Foreigners Act, 2004 and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each under Section 24 of BNSS, against which t vh he present appeals filed.

3. The case of the prosecution is that PW1 / the Sub Inspector of Police attached to Veerapandi Police Station, on 24.02.2025 at about 01.30 p.m., while on patrol duty along with Head Constable Sathiyaraj / PW2 and one Alexondar, Constable, secret information received, that Bangladeshis, overstaying in India, hence, he went to Iduvampalayam, Srinagar at Malliga Compound. There he found two male and one female with two children and enquired them. They spoke to him in Hindi hence he called one woman constable, namely, Muthulakshmi and PW5, home guard who was conversant in Hindi.

3.1. During initial interrogation, the accused persons admitted that they came from Bangladesh and their names are

(1) Mohamed Musa Ali Pada, (2) M.Nizha Akhtar, who is the wife of Mohamed Musa Ali Pada and (3) Mohamed Roni. A1 and A2 have twin male children, namely, Mansoor Ali and Lalip Ali and all are residing in Tiruppur for six years and twin children were born to them on 04.09.2023 at Tiruppur, Medical College Hospital.

3.2. On further enquiry, it was revealed that they came to India without any visa and possess no valid documents to enter India. Thereafter, he had taken the accused persons along with special report produced before PW6 / Inspector of Police, Veerapandi Police Station who registered FIR / Ex.P9 and thereafter PW6 visited the scene of occurrence and prepared an Observation Mahazar / Ex.P10 and Rough Sketch / Ex.P11 in the presence of the witnesses, collected documents and after completion of investigation filed a charge sheet in this case.

4. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses (P.W.1 to P.W.6) and adduced 12 exhibits (Ex.P1 to Ex.P12) on their side. Three material objects (MO-1 to MO-3) were adduced.

5. On conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court convicted the appellants as stated above.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that A1 and A2 are husband and wife and they are residing in Tiruppur, employed in a Banian Factory for more than six years. During the stay in Tiruppur they were blessed with twin male children on 04.09.2023. Further, submitted that the delivery at Tiruppur Medical College Hospital and at that time they have given all details. Due to political unrest, unemployment and poverty they moved out from Bangaldesh to Tiruppur seeking employment for their livelihood. At the time of crossing the border post, they informed their entry. During the stay in Tiruppur they have not come under adverse notice to the law authorities. This being so, now due to the change of Government policy they are targeted and now they have been arrested detained and from the date of arrest on

25.02.2025, they are in prison. The petitioners are ready and willing to go back to their country and in this case neither the Investigating Agency nor the Superintendent of Prison after their arrest and detention informed the Bangladesh Consulate or any authorities, the detention of the foreign national and not complied Rule 531. He further submitted that in this case, the Repatriation of Prisoners Act would also apply. Further, in this case the Investigating Officer admitted that he had not informed the Ministry of External Affairs about the foreign national detention. The respondent police not clear and certain whether the petitioners are foreign national or not. In such circumstances, convicting the petitioners under the Foreigners Act is not proper. He further submitted though PW1 submits that he had received secret information, and thereafter, apprehended the accused persons but no secret information produced to PW6 / Investigating Officer, no such secret report produced or filed.

7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) strongly opposed the petitioners’ contention and filed a counter affidavit and submitted that in this case PW1, Sub Inspector of Police attached to the respondent on 24.02.2025 at about 01.30 p.m. along with his police team was on patrol duty. At that time, he received secret information that foreigners without valid permit are over staying in Iduvampalayam, Srinagar at Malliga Compound. The police team went their, found two male and one female along with two children. They were unable to converse in Tamil and speaking Hindi. Thereafter, one women constable and home guard / PW5 translated and explained to the detained persons and during enquiry, it was revealed that A1 and A2 had come to India, Tiruppur six years hence they were blessed with twin children born to them on 04.09.2023 at Tiruppur, Medical College Hospital. The birth certificate of the children produced, and seized in the mahazar. Since no public came forward during seizure and drawing of mahazar in the presence of the police. Bangladesh voter ID is Ex.P2, cell phone of A1 MO1, all seized. Birth Certificates of two male children is Ex.P3 and Ex.P4. Likewise from the second accused seizure mahazar Ex.P5 drawn, Bangladesh citizenship certificate is Ex.P6 and his cell phone is MO2 seized. From the third accused similar documents Ex.P7, E.P8 and MO3 seized. She further submitted that in this case all the three accused knowing well that they were illegal staying in Tiruppur without valid documents consciously avoided using smart phone with Wifi and Whatsapp and all three accused using button phones which confirm knowingly these people illegally residing here. During trial, PW1 / Sub Inspector of Police, PW2 / Head Constable, PW3 witness for arrest confession, PW4 / landlady, PW5 / home guard translator and PW6 / Investigating Officer were examined. On conclusion of trial, the Trial Court rightly convicted the petitioners.

8. Considering the submissions and materials available on record, it is seen that in this case, the petitioners are Bangladesh National which is not seriously disputed or agitated by the learned counsel for the appellants. They submit that the appellants migrated to Tiruppur seeking job and they are residing in Tiruppur for more than six years. They hold till date Bangladesh voter ID and citizenship card. They are natural citizens living here and also begotten two children, for their livelihood and subsistence they are living in Tiruppur to make earnings and livelihood. They are law biding citizens and not come under any adverse notice to the law enforcing authorities. Now they are willing to go back to their country. Their only contention is that they have been imposed two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. Since they are detained and in the prison, their fine and sentence can be set aside or default sentence can be reduced.

9. At this stage, it is necessary to find out from the prison authorities what is the status of the appellants whether concerned authorities, including Bangladesh Consulate are informed about the conviction and detention of the appellants

(1) What will be the status if they complete their sentence (2) What steps so far taken with all details not only about the appellants but also similarly placed Bangladesh and foreigners who have been convicted as illegal immigrants to be reported after getting instructions from the appropriate jail authorities.

10. List the matter on 21.09.2026.”

2. In continuation of the order dated 03.09.2026 passed in these appeals, today, the learned counsel for the appellants produced written submission on behalf of the appellants.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the admitted position of the prosecution case is that, the appellants are from Bangladesh Foreign Nation and they were found in Tiruppur. The appellants were not conversant with the local language and they were not known to read or write and understand Tamil. But the entire trial proceedings were conducted in a regional language-Tamil. Hence,

appellants were denied meaningful and effective opportunity to understand the allegation and to defend their case. Further, though it has been projected that the service of interpreter, namely Jayadurga Devi was employed, but her qualification and competency have not been proved. The Apex Court, in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Narottam Dhakad, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1069, had held that, if denial of effective opportunity is proved, then it amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and benefit has to be given to the appellants and the case against them to be quashed and conviction cannot be sustained.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants referred to the guidelines issued by Ministry of Home Affairs in F.14011/55/09 F-VI, dated 23.11.2009 circular, wherein the procedure of deportation of Bangaladeshi Nationals given, further particularly referred to paragraph No.2(v) of the circular, which is extracted below:- 2(v)In respect of Bangladeshi nationals found to be staying unauthorizedly in any particular State/UT, proper inquiry shall be conducted by the State Government / UT concerned. If the suspected Bangladeshi national claims

Indian citizenship and residence of a place in any other Indian State/UT, the concerned State Government/UT would send to the Home, Secretary of the State/UT and District Collector/District Magistrate of the District from where the suspected person claims to hail, the details including name, parentage, residential address, details of near relatives etc. the State Government / UT / Collector/District Magistrate concerned in turn will ensure that appropriate report is sent the deporting State Government / UT after proper verification within a period of 30 days. All the States/UTs shall issue appropriate instructions to the District Collectors/District Magistrates for ensuring verification of claim of such suspected persons well in time. During the period of 30 days, the competent authority will ensure, by obtaining permission of the court wherever necessary, the detention of such persons to ensure physical availability at the time of deportation. If no report is received within the period of 30 days, the competent authority may take necessary action to deport the suspected Bangladeshi national.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants referred to paragraph Nos.14 & 19 of the Hon’ble Apex Court Judgment in M/s.Maja Daruwala and another v. State of West Bengal reported in 2025 Law Finder SC 4783. The same are extracted hereunder: “14.The pivotal issue that falls for our consideration is that if an illegal immigrant from Bangladesh after being apprehended and proceeded under Section 14 A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 is convicted and sentenced to undergo a particular term of imprisonment then after he completes his term of sentence should be immediately repatriated/deported to his own country or should he be kept for an indefinite period in the Correctional Homes in India. The only confusion in our mind is that once an illegal immigrant is put to trial and is held guilty then what is the requirement for further verification of his nationality at the end of the Ministry of External Affairs.

19. The plain reading of Clause 2(v) indicates that the entire exercise is to be completed i.e.the exercise of deportation, verification etc., within a period of 30 days.”

6. He further submitted that appellants’ conviction comes to end on 11.05.2027 and now pleads that since they are in Prison without any earnings and no relatives nearby unable to pay fine amount of Rs.10,000/- each and sought waiver of the same or atleast default sentence of three months can be reduced, on this point referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Shahejad Khan Mahebukhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat reported in 2013 (1) SCC 570.

7. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) filed counter and submitted that in this case during the trial PW1 to PW6 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P12 were marked and MO1 to MO3 were produced. P.W.1 had lodged a complaint, which is marked as Ex.P9.

P.W.2 is the police personnel who accompanied P.W.1, who had corroborated the evidence of P.W.1. P.W.3 is the attestor of the confession statement. P.W.4 is the house owner of the appellants. According to P.W.4, the appellants had not disclosed that they belong to Bangladesh and, considering them to be a North Indian, the house was let out for rent to them. Though the appellants promised to handover their Aadhar Card, they failed to submit the Aadhar card to P.W.4. P.W.5 is the Translator, who had assisted during investigation in recording the confession statements of the appellants. P.W.6 is the Inspector of Police, who had filed charge sheet and marked Exs.P6 to P12. The children, namely Mansoor Ali and Lalip Ali were born to the first and second accused on 04.09.2023 at Tiruppur Medical College Hospital. Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 are the Birth Certificates of Mansoor Ali and Lalip ali. Based on the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, supported by the prosecution documents and material objects, the trial Court rightly convicted the appellants.

8. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) further submitted that the appellants, who are citizens of Bangaladesh had entered into India without valid passport, visa or travel documents. The appellants have admitted that they are Bangaladesh in nationality and further they have not claimed that they are Indian citizens. Thus, the prosecution had clearly proved that the appellants are foreigners. Though the appellants take a plea that they came to India for their livelihood, this plea cannot absolve them from statutory requirement of possessing valid travel documents and, hence, the trial Court rightly convicted the appellants under the Foreigners Act and the said conviction is sustainable and prayed for dismissal of the appeals. The learned Government Advocate further submitted that appellants were arrested and remanded on 24.02.2025, later came out on bail on 21.09.2026. After conviction, appellants again remanded on 14.10.2025 and they are now confined in Central Prison-I, Puzhal. As on date they are in prison for nearly 730 days. She further produced the communication from Regional Special Deputy Collector, Srilankan Tamil Rehabilitation Camp, Kotappattu, Tiruchirappalli, in reference No.B1/104/2026 dated 18.09.2026, wherein the procedure taken by the authority with respect to Bangladeshi nationals has given as follows:-

“10.Details of procedural steps taken by concerned Authorities with respect to Bangladeshi nationals detained, in line with the Repatriation of Prisoners Act, in respect of this Taluk: It is submitted that the following procedure is followed with respect to Bangladeshi nationals lodged in the Special Camp: the identity proofs of the inmates are forwarded by the Police Department to the Bangladesh High Commission for verification. Upon verification by the concerned Government of Bangladesh, a Travel Permit is issued in respect of the verified nationals. Subsequently, a Government Order is issued for release of the said nationals from the Camp for the purpose of deportation to their native country.”

9. Considering the submissions and upon a perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that P.W.1 is the Sub-Inspector of Police, attached to Veerapandi Police Station. On 24.02.2025, at about 01.30 p.m., while on patrol duty, he found two male and one female with two children. On suspicion, enquired them and at that time they have admitted that they are Bangladesh citizens entered India without any valid documents. He seized Birth certificates of A3 / Mohamed Roni, Mansoor Ali and Lalip

Ali. Ex.P2 is the national identity card of Mohamed Musa Ali Pada (A2) issued by the Government of the Bangladesh Election Commission and Ex.P8 is the Birth Certificate of Mohamed Roni (A3) issued by Bangladesh authorities. Ex.P6 is the Bangladesh Citizenship Certificate of A2. Thus, A1 to A3 are Bangladesh citizens had been proved and they have not entered into India through valid documents.

10. On the evidence and materials, the trial Court had rightly convicted the appellants. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the trial Court in S.C.No.151 of 2025 dated 14.10.2025 and confirms the conviction of the appellants for offence under Section 14(A)(b) of Foreigners Act, 2004.

11. As regards the sentence imposed, it is seen that the appellants had come to India in search of livelihood, they had stayed in Tiruppur for quite some time, and the first and second accused had also given birth to two children, namely, Mansoor Ali and Lalip Ali, at the Tiruppur Government Hospital. Ex.P3 and Ex.P4, the birth certificates of Mansoor Ali and Lalip Ali, respectively, confirm the same. The appellants had also been employed in banian factories in Tiruppur on a daily-wage basis. It is not in dispute that the appellants, owing to the unrest in Bangladesh and the uncertainty of their future, and being unemployed and impoverished, came in search of employment and livelihood to sustain themselves and their families. Admittedly, they are neither involved in nor convicted of any economic offence, nor have they enriched themselves so as to assume that they possess the means to pay the fine. Thus, considering the circumstances of the appellants/accused, there is no doubt that they are very poor, are seeking livelihood, have migrated in search of employment, and are in penury and unable to pay the fine amount. Considering their pecuniary circumstances and following the principles laid down in Shahejad Khan Mahebukhan Pathan (cited supra), this Court confirms the sentence of fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) imposed on each of the appellants and modifies the default sentence of three months' Simple Imprisonment to one week. Except for the aforesaid modification in the default sentence, the sentence of two years Rigorous Imprisonment is confirmed.

12. Further, in view of the directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of Maja Daruwala (cited supra), approving the Circular dated 23.11.2009 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the exercise of deportation is required to be completed within a period of thirty days, and the said direction is to be followed without deviation or delay. Hence, the concerned authorities are directed to take appropriate action and ensure that the appellants, along with their children, are deported to Bangladesh within a period of thirty days after they have undergone their period of sentence and the default sentence of one week.

13. With the above directions and observations, these appeals are partly allowed. 28.09.2026 ep/jd To

1. The II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Veerapandi Police Station, Tiruppur District.

3. The Central Prison, Puzhal-I.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. ep

CRL A.Nos.17 & 497 of 2026 28.09.2026