KABC010080122024 IN THE COURT OF XLIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, [SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NIA CASES], (CCH-50) AT BENGALURU Dated : 08th day of April, 2024 PRESENT: SRI GANGADHARA C.M., B.Com.,LL.B., XLIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, [Special Judge for trial of NIA Cases], (CCH-50) Bengaluru. CRL.MISC.NO.2860/2024 Petitioner No.1 : Mr. Firdoush @ Md Ferdous Bapari @ Firdous, S/o Moksed Bapari, Aged about 37 years, R/at No.70, Outer Ring Road Devarabesanahalli, Bellanduru, Bengaluru. Permanent Address : Purba Khortakata, Rajapura Shoronkhola Bagerhat, Bangaldesh. Petitioner No.2 : Mr. Muhammed Oli Ullah, S/o Muhammed Muktiar Ali Khan, Aged about 33 years, R/at No.18, 1st Floor, Murugesh Modaliar Road, Frazer Town, Bengaluru. Permanent Address : Near Haneef Sheikh Madarasa, Nuthan Bazar Chowk, Ruksha Post and Police Station, Khulna Division, Bangaldesh Petitioner No.3 : Mr. Amol Chandra Das @ Amol Das @ Sujib, S/o Late Sukumar Chandra Das, Aged about 26 years, R/at Sishu Mandir Lane, Vivekananda Road, Ward Number 26, Silcar Town, Cachar, Assam. Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 Permanent R/o Alangjuri, Itna Police Station Limits, Kishorganj, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.4 : Mr. Masud Sarder @ Masud @ Masud Abdul, S/o Abdula, Aged about 33 years, R/at #12, Ayyappa Layout, Mallasandra, Bengaluru North – 560057. Permanent Address : Uttar Amargachia Village, Khontakata, Saronkhola, Bagerhat, Khulna Division, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.5 : Mr. Md. Sohag Gazi @ Sauhag, S/o Md. Mofajjel Gazi, Aged about 41 years, R/at #22/1, Nithari Sector 31, Dadri Noida, Gautham Buddhanagar, Uttarpradesh – 201301. Permanent Address : Madda Khontakata, Bagerghat, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.6 : Mr. Suman Shaikh Zakir @ Zakir @ Saudi Zakir, S/o Ishuf Ali, Aged about 46 years, R/at 34th Cross, Kariyammana Agrahara, Bellandur, Bengaluru – 560103. Permanent Address : Godhada Village, Near GB Aminahotooum, Dakhil Madrassa, Morrelganj, Bagerghat, Khulana Division, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.7 : Mr. SK. Md. Bellal @ Mohammed Bellal, S/o Md. Noor Islam Sheikh, Aged about 46 years, R/at Ganigarahalli, Chikkabanavara, Bengaluru – 560090. Permanent Address : Bagerghat, Khulna Division, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.8 : Mr. Md. Mirazul Islam @ Mohammad Mirazul, S/o Saheb Ali, Aged about 25 years R/at D-574 F/F, Gali No.21, Chauhan Banger, Seelampur North East Delhi, Delhi- 110053. Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 Permanent Address: Badnabanga Village, Sankibanga Post, Morelgunj Sub-District, Bagerghat, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.9 : Mr. Zakir Khan @ Md. Zakir Talukder, S/o Md. Kder Talukder, Aged about 33 years, R/at Mico Layout, Opp: NS Nilayam, Hongasandra, Begur, Bengaluru. Permanent Address : Amtoli Village & Post, Murulgunj Police Station Limits, Bagerghat District, Khulna Division, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.10 : Mr. Md. Badal Houladar Badol Howlader, S/o Md. Hakim Howlader, Aged about 52 years, R/at 24 Paragans, Bithari, Swarupnagar, Uttarpara, Bithari North 24 Paraganas, West Bengal – 743286. Permanent Address : Khontakata Village, Sharankhola Upazila, Bagerghat District. Khulna Division, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.11 : Md. Kabir Talukder @ Kobir S/o Kader, Aged about 42 years, R/at 1st Main Road, Muneshwara Layout, Begur, Bengaluru – 5600068. Permanent Address : East Khontakata Village, Sharankhola Upazila, Bagerghat District, Bangladesh. Petitioner No.12 : Mr. Md. Bacchu Gharami Mohammed Bashir Hosen @ Bacchu Garami, S/o Md. Ismail Gharami, Aged about 43 years, R/at #225, Golahalli, Mecca Masjid, Anjanaojra Alahalli, Bengaluru. Permanent Address : Yogipole Post Office, Shiromani 9204, Dighila, Khulna Division, Bangladesh. (By : Sri M. Krishnegowda, Advocate) Vs. Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 Respondent : The National Investigation Agency, Bengaluru. (By: Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor) ORDERS The petitioners have filed this bail petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in R.C.No.1/2023/NIA/BLR for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). In fact, the respondent agency has not registered the case in R.C.No.1/2023/NIA/BLR for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B r/w Section 34 of IPC, but it has registered for the offences under sections Sections 120-B, 370, 465 and 471 of IPC and Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short ‘U.A.(P) Act’).

2. The petitioners, in their bail petition, have stated the

facts of the case in brief and specifically pleaded that the allegations made by the respondent agency is only an assumption. They are innocents and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegations made against them are baseless. They have further pleaded that they hail from respectable families, having deep roots in the society and there are no bad antecedents against them. They were arrested on 08.11.2023 and they have been in judicial custody since then. They have further pleaded that they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, they have prayed to allow the bail petition.

3. During the pendency of the petition, the learned counsel

for the petitioners filed a memo stating that the petition of Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 petitioner Nos.6, 7, 8 and 10 may be dismissed as withdrawn. Hence, the petition of petitioner Nos.6, 7, 8 and 10 was dismissed on 28.03.2024 as withdrawn.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor has opposed the

bail petition by filing his objections. He has stated the facts of the case in brief and specifically contended that the respondent agency has completed the investigation and submitted the charge- sheet against the petitioners and other accused persons and a case has been registered against them in Spl.C.No.187/2024 for the offences under Sections 120-B and 370(3) of IPC, Section 14, 14-A(b) and 14-C of Foreigners Act and Section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 r/w Rule 6 of the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950. The charge-sheet materials clearly indicate that the petitioners have trafficked 22 Bangladeshi nationals into India illegally on the false promise of providing jobs and they were subjected to forced labour for meager wages and confined them in waste segregation godown and shed. The petition averments clearly indicate that the petitioners are the permanent residents of Bangladesh and the same would make it abundantly clear that they are involved in the said offences as indicated in the charge- sheet. Hence, there is a prima facie case about the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged crime. Such being the case, there being no personal animosity between the respondent agency and the petitioners and the aspect of false implication would not arise. Hence, he has prayed to reject the bail petition.

5. This Court has heard the arguments of the learned

counsel appearing for petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 and the Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 learned counsel representing the learned Special Public Prosecutor.

6. The points that arise for court consideration are as

follows : 1) Whether petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 have made out grounds to exercise the discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., and to enlarge them on regular bail? 2) What order?

7. Findings of this Court to the above points are as

follows :- Point No.1 : In the negative; Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following; R E A S O N S

8. Point No.1 :- It is the case of the prosecution that the

Central Government received a reliable information that certain entities based in Karnataka having linkages with facilitators and traffickers based in Assam, Tripura and Bangladesh, which are part of a transnational human trafficking network and are involved in trafficking of persons of Bangladesh and Rohingya of Myanmar origin, into India through Indo-Bangladesh border by the said accused persons and the accused persons were using fake identity documents and were in touch with cadres of proscribed terrorist organisations operating from across the border with an intent to facilitate infiltration of operatives and sympathizers of these organisations into India. Therefore, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, CTCR Division, North Block, New Delhi issued an order vide F.No.11011/91/2023/NIA, dated Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 07.11.2023 and directed the NIA to take up the investigation of the said case. Accordingly, the NIA registered a case in R.C.No.01/2023/NIA/BLR on 07.11.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 370, 465 and 471 of IPC and Section 18 of U.A.(P) Act and took up the investigation. During the investigation, searches were conducted at various places and seized various documents of Bangladesh indicating the nationality of the accused persons along with certain digital devices. The accused persons were traced, arrested and they were produced before this Court and they were remanded to Police custody for custodial interrogation. After completion of custodial interrogation, the petitioners were produced before this court and they were remanded to judicial custody. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of witnesses, collected other evidence against the accused persons and submitted the final report before this Court for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B and 370(3) of IPC, Sections 14, 14-A(b) and 14-C of Foreigners Act and Section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 r/w Rule 6 of the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950. At this stage, petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12, who are in judicial custody, have approached this Court for seeking bail.

9. It is well settled proposition of law that the Court cannot

hold a mini trial while considering the bail application whereas, the court has to consider whether there is any prima facie case or reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is involved in the alleged crime, nature and gravity of the offence, severity of the punishment in the event of conviction, chances of fleeing away from the justice, chances of threatening or tampering of the Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 prosecution witnesses, antecedents of the accused and the interest of society at large. In this regard, this Court has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, reported in (2019) 5 SCC 1. In this decision, the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down at para 21 as follows: “21. Before we proceed to analyse the rival submissions, it is apposite to restate the settled legal position about matters to be considered for deciding an application for bail, to wit; (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. (State of U.P. through CBI Vs. Amarmani Tripathi).” Keeping in mind the aforesaid salutary principles, this Court has taken the facts of this case for consideration.

10. It is the specific allegation that the petitioners are

Bangladeshi nationals and they illegally entered into India without valid documents. In this regard, LW.18 – Sri Alamin, LW, LW.20 – Sri Masood Gazi, LW.21 – Sri Kabeer, LW.22 – Sri Abdul Mannan, LW.23 – Smt Rayeena Begum, LW.24 – Smt Monira Khatun, LW.26 – Md. Jiya @ Ziya, LW.27 – Sri Md. Akash, LW.28 – Sri Muhammad Shakore, LW.30 – Sri Mohammed Mohsin Khan, Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 LW.33 – Sri Ismail, LW.45 – Sri Shabeer Khan have stated before the investigation officer that they are Bangladeshi nationals and petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 are also Bangladeshi nationals. The investigation officer has conducted searches in the houses of the petitioners during the investigation. During the said searches, the Investigating Officer seized Bangladeshi document and copy of the passport of accused No.1 from the house of accused No.1, Bangladeshi document and passport issued by Bangladesh Government were seized from the house of accused No.2, Bangladeshi currency, passport application form and appointment receipt from the house of accused No.4. Further, the wife of accused No.9 produced birth certificate of accused No.9 issued in Bangladesh before the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer has also collected the passport issued by Bangladesh Government in favour of accused No.5 and other documents in support of the said allegations. Further, petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 themselves have stated in their petition that they are permanent residents of Bangladesh. They have not produced any documents before this Court to show that they come to India with valid documents. Hence, there are prima facie materials to show that petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 are Bangladeshi nationals and they illegally entered into India without valid documents.

11. It is the next allegation of the prosecution that petitioners

Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 fraudulently obtained Indian identity cards such as PAN card, voter ID card, Aadhar card, ration card, etc., for themselves and for their family members. In this regard, the investigation officer has conducted house searches during the investigation and sized Indian identity cards such as PAN card, Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 voter ID card, Aadhar card, ration card, etc. As discussed supra, petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 are not Indians, but Indian identity cards were in their possession. Hence, the charge-sheet materials prima facie indicate that petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 fraudulently obtained Indian identity cards such as PAN card, voter ID card, Aadhar card, ration card, etc., for themselves and for their family members.

12. It is the next allegation of the prosecution that some of

the petitioners collected money from Bangladeshi nationals and with the assistance of agents/touts in Indo-Bangladesh border near Benapole of Bangladesh, they trafficked Bangladeshi nationals into India with the false promise of providing them jobs in India with valid Indian documents. Some of the petitioners assisted the co-accused persons in trafficking Bangladeshi nationals into India. Once trafficked into India, the trafficked Bangladeshi nationals were confined in godwons/sheds and subjected to hard labour for meager wages by threatening them of arrest by Indian Police.

13. In this regard, LW.18 – Sri Alamin, LW, LW.20 – Sri

Masood Gazi, LW.21 – Sri Kabeer, LW.22 – Sri Abdul Mannan, LW.23 – Smt Rayeena Begum, LW.24 – Smt Monira Khatun, LW.26 – Md. Jiya @ Ziya, LW.27 – Sri Md. Akash, LW.28 – Sri Muhammad Shakore, LW.30 – Sri Mohammed Mohsin Khan, LW.33 – Sri Ismail, LW.45 – Sri Shabeer Khan have stated before the investigation officer that they paid money to some of the petitioners to bring them to India. They have further stated that they were brought to India with false promise of providing them Crl.Misc.No.2860/2024 jobs in India with valid Indian documents. They were made to work day and night in waste segregation godown of some of the petitioners for meager amount. When they asked for some good job like security guard, hospital works, etc., some of the petitioners threatened that they would inform about them to Bengaluru Police and would make them arrest by Bengaluru Police.

14. A perusal of the aforesaid facts, there is a prima facie

case against the petitioners about their involvement in the alleged crime. The alleged coffences are punishable with imprisonment for life. The apprehension of the prosecution that if the petitioners are released on bail, they are likely to flee away from justice and threaten the prosecution witnesses who are under their control. The said apprehension cannot be ruled out as the petitioners are Bangladeshi nationals and the victims of the crime are under their control. In the opinion of the Court, this is not a fit case to exercise discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. and the bail application filed by the petitioners is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Court has answered Point No.1 in the negative.

15. Point No.2 :- In view of the discussions made supra, this

Court proceeds to pass the following :- O R D E R The bail petition filed by petitioner Nos.1 to 5, 9, 11 and 12 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected. (Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I, transcription thereof computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by me, in open Court on this 08nd day of April, 2024) (GANGADHARA C.M.), XLIX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, (Special Judge for trial of NIA Cases), (CCH-50) Bengaluru. *HRN/-