Despite appeal being non-maintainable before High Court, court directs appellant to be housed in holding centre post-release and restrains deportation until citizenship application under Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 is decided.
In a significant judgment delivered on October 15, 2026, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Jay Sengupta, dismissed the appeal filed by Oishe Biswas against her conviction under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The conviction was originally passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), Bongaon, North 24 Parganas, sentencing the appellant to two years imprisonment along with a fine. The court held that the High Court was not the proper forum to entertain the appeal, which lies before the Sessions Court.
The appellant, Ms. Biswas, had entered India in 2011 fleeing religious persecution in Bangladesh and subsequently married and settled in India. She claimed protection under the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019 and had a pending application for Indian citizenship. Despite the dismissal of her appeal as non-maintainable, the High Court exercised its inherent powers to issue protective directions considering the imminent completion of her sentence.
The Court directed that following her release from the correctional home by October 21, 2026, Ms. Biswas shall be placed in a designated holding centre, equipped with necessary amenities, and shall not be deported to Bangladesh until her citizenship application is duly disposed of. The Court emphasized the interest of justice and prevented prejudice by ensuring that the appellant is not sent back to her country while her legal status is under consideration.
The judgment further permitted Ms. Biswas to file a proper appeal before the Sessions Court, which was directed to dispose of the matter expeditiously and on merits, without being influenced by observations made in the High Court proceedings.
Senior Counsel for the appellant highlighted her plight, emphasizing her fear of persecution and pending citizenship application under the CAA. The Union of India and the State authorities acknowledged the appellant's potential entitlement under the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025. The Court also referred to relevant Government of West Bengal guidelines for holding centres to ensure the appellant's humane treatment.
This ruling underscores the procedural requirement that appeals against convictions by ACJM lie before the Sessions Court and not the High Court. Simultaneously, it reflects the judiciary's sensitivity in safeguarding the rights of individuals who face complex immigration and citizenship issues, especially under new legislative frameworks such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.
Bottom Line:
Appeal against conviction by ACJM lies before Sessions Court and not High Court - Yet, considering imminent completion of sentence and pending citizenship application under Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, Court exercised inherent powers to direct that appellant be kept in holding centre after release and not be deported to Bangladesh till disposal of citizenship application.
Statutory provision(s):
Foreigners Act, 1946 Section 14, Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025
Oishe Biswas v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2998013
