Arnab Mandal vs State By
- Neutral2025:KHC:21529
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