Seema Rani Karmakar@Shima Karmaker v. The State Of West Bengal

July 09, 2025 7 ARDR (Rejected)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

C.R.M. (M) 173 of 2025 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mekhliganj Police Station Case No. 146 of 2025 dated 16/5/2025 under Sections 318(4)/336(2)/336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of the BNS read with Section 14A Foreigner Act, 1946.

And In Re :

Seema Rani Karmakar @ Shima Karmaker ... Petitioner Mr. Biswaroop Roy, Mr. Liton Ali ... for the Petitioner.

Mr. Nilay Chakraborty, Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee ... For the State.

This is an application seeking bail in connection with an offence inter alia under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. It is submitted by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner happens to be an Indian citizen. She is a resident of Siliguri. She has several documents which establishes that she is an Indian citizen.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State relies upon the materials in the Case Diary and opposes the prayer for bail.

It appears from the Case Diary that the documents standing in the name of the petitioner were sent for verification. From the report submitted by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office, Bureau of Immigration, it transpires that the petitioner Seema Rani Karmakar has Bangladeshi Passport standing in her name. She last visited Indian territory on a tourist visa bearing no. VL4563156

dated November 6, 2019. The report also indicates that Bangladeshi Passport was issued in her name and that older Passport was also issued by Bangladesh in the name of the petitioner.

In such circumstances, it transpires from the material in the Case Diary that the petitioner happens to be a Bangladeshi national holding the Passport issued by Bangladesh. She visited the Indian territory on visa issued in the year 2019. Considering the aforesaid circumstances and the materials available in the Case Diary as well the report, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. The application for bail being CRM (M) 173 of 2025 is, thus, disposed of.

Case Diary be returned.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)