Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Arnab Mandal vs State By

Karnataka High Court20 June 2025S Vishwajith Shetty

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an accused is charged with offences involving facilitation of illegal immigration and fraudulent acquisition of identity documents by foreign nationals, the completion of investigation and filing of a charge sheet does not automatically entitle the accused to bail; the court may refuse bail where the prima facie material shows that the accused has engaged in activities endangering the sovereignty of the nation, there is a substantial risk of commission of similar offences in future, and the accused hails from a different state making it difficult to secure his presence for trial.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

-1- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5554 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

ARNAB MANDAL S/O KUSHAL MANDAL AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT KRISHNAPPA BUILDING ILALIGE VILLAGE, ATTIBELE VILLAGE, AEKAL TALUK BENGALURU, PINCODE - 562 107. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI RANGANATH REDDY R, ADV.) AND:

1. STATE BY SURYANAGAR POLICE STATION BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Digitally PIN - 560 001. signed by NANDINI M S Location: 2. SRI B K MOHANKUMAR HIGH COURT DYSP, ANEKAL SUB DIVISION OF ATTIBELE HOBLI KARNATAKA ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU - 562 107. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO GRANT REGULAR BAIL TO THE PETITIONER IN CR NO.500/2024 REGISTERED BY SURYANAGAR POLICE STATION REGISTERED IN 3RD ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT SIT AT ANEKAL, WHICH IS NOW COMMITTED AND PENDING AS CC NO.885/2025 SURYA NAGAR POLICE FOR THE O/U/S 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) OF BNSS R/W 34, -2- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

35, 36 OF AADHAR ACT 2016, SECTION 14, 14A OF FOREIGNERS ACT AND SECTION 12(1)(A)(a)(b) INDIAN PASSPORT ACT.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused no.1 in Crime No.500/2024 registered by

Suryanagar Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the offences

punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS,

2023, Sections 34, 35, 36 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 and Section

14, 14(A) of Foreigners Act and Section 12(1)(A)(a)(b) of

Indian Passport Act, is before this Court under Section 483 of

BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.500/2024 was registered by Suryanagar

Police Station, Bengaluru District, initially for the offences

punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS,

2023 and Sections 34, 36, 35 of Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of

Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016,

against the petitioner based on the first information dated

22.11.2024 received from B.K.Mohan Kumar - Police Officer -3- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

attached to Suryanagar Police Station, Bengaluru District.

During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner herein

was arrested on 23.11.2024, and subsequently remanded to

judicial custody. Investigation of the case is completed and

charge sheet has been filed against two persons for the

aforesaid offences. Bail application filed by the petitioner before

the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.5034/2024 was

rejected on 14.02.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

maximum punishment for the alleged offences is imprisonment

for a period of seven years. Petitioner has no criminal

antecedents. He is in custody for the last more than six

months. Since investigation is already completed, his custodial

interrogation may not be necessary. Accordingly, he prays to

allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP has seriously opposed the

petition. She submits that petitioner has committed anti-

national activities, and therefore, it is not safe to enlarge him

on bail. Merely for the reason that charge sheet is filed,

accused cannot be enlarged on bail. Petitioner hails from West -4- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

Bengal and in the event he is enlarged on bail, it would be

difficult to secure his presence. Accordingly, she prays to

dismiss the petition.

6. First information was submitted by B.K.Mohan Kumar -

Police Officer attached to Suryanagar Police Station, Bengaluru

District, alleging that based on the credible information

received he had conducted a raid to a Cyber Centre known as

Wow Technology, U.K., and had apprehended the petitioner

who was found in the Cyber Centre and had recovered large

number of rental agreements and other documents which were

used by the petitioner for the purpose of creating fraudulent

PAN cards and Aadhaar Cards in favour of illegal immigrants

from Bangladesh. The petitioner herein was subsequently

produced before the court and remanded to judicial custody.

After completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed

against the petitioner and another who is a Bangladesh citizen.

7. The allegation against the petitioner in the charge sheet

is that petitioner was concocting document using fake letter

head, seals, etc., and on the basis of the said documents, he

was providing PAN cards and Aadhaar cards to citizens of -5- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

Bangladesh who were introduced to him by accused no.2.

During the course of investigation, huge number of rental

agreements, fake seals, Aadhaar card applications in the name

of different persons were recovered from the office of the

petitioner. In addition to the same, huge number of

applications for the purpose of applying for PAN card and

Aadhaar card which stood in different names were also

recovered.

8. From the overall reading of the entire charge sheet

material, it is found that petitioner was providing PAN cards

and Aadhaar cards to Bangladesh citizens who were introduced

to him by accused no.2 who is a Bangladesh citizen and the

petitioner was concocting documents for the purpose of

obtaining PAN cards and Aadhaar cards in the name of illegal

immigrants from Bangladesh.

9. Section 152 of BNS, 2023, which is introduced in place of

Section 124A of IPC, reads as under:

"152. Acts endangering sovereignty unity and integrity of India Whoever, purposely or knowingly, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible -6- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

representation, or by electronic communication or by use of financial mean, or otherwise, excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India; or indulges in or commits any such act shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.- Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures, or administrative or other action of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means without exciting or attempting to excite the activities referred to in this section do not constitute an offence under this section."

10. The act committed by the petitioner as found in the

charge sheet has the effect of endangering the sovereignty,

unity and integrity of India and the said act is punishable with

imprisonment for life under Section 152 of BNS, 2023.

However, the Investigation Officer has prima facie erred in not

invoking Section 152 of BNS, 2023, in the present case against

the petitioner though the charge sheet material prima facie -7- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

makes out a case for the said offence. In the present case,

though charge sheet has been filed, charges are yet to be

framed by the Trial Court.

11. Under the circumstances, merely for the reason that

investigation of the case is completed and charge sheet has

been filed, the petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail, more so

considering the serious nature of offences alleged against him

and there being direct detrimental effect on the security of the

nation.

12. The charge sheet would go to show that huge number of

documents were recovered from the office of the petitioner,

which prima facie go to show that he was making preparations

to apply for PAN cards and Aadhaar cards in the name of many

more citizens of Bangladesh which makes it apparent that large

number of illegal immigrants have already entered the territory

of India.

13. Accused no.2 who is a Bangladesh national has been

charge sheeted for the offences punishable under the

provisions of the Foreigners Act and the charge sheet material -8- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

would go to show that petitioner has assisted and abetted him

to commit the alleged offences, and therefore, the alleged act

of the petitioner would attract Sections 13 & 14(C) of the

Foreigners Act.

14. The material on record prima facie would go to show that

petitioner was indulged in providing fake PAN cards and

Aadhaar cards to the illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who

were introduced to him by accused no.2. The whereabouts of

the said illegal immigrants who entered India is not yet known.

From the activities of the petitioner, it is apparent that he has

indulged in activities endangering the sovereignty of the nation

and in the event he is enlarged on bail, it cannot be ruled out

that he may indulge in committing similar offences in future.

15. Petitioner hails from West Bengal State and as rightly

contended by the learned HCGP, it would be difficult to secure

his presence for the purpose of trial. The seized documents

would clearly go to show that petitioner had made

arrangements to apply for PAN cards and Aadhaar cards on the

basis of the fake documents and the same clearly points out at

the gravity of the crime committed by the petitioner. Merely for -9- NC: 2025:KHC:21529 CRL.P No. 5554 of 2025

HC-KAR

the reason that charge sheet is filed in a case or for the reason

that the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment for

a period of seven years, accused cannot be released on bail.

The material collected by the prosecution would prima facie

show that it is not safe to enlarge the accused on bail. Under

the circumstances, I am of the opinion that at this stage

petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail, cannot be

entertained. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

KK

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free