Court Rules Appeal Against Conviction Not Maintainable After Guilty Plea; Criticizes Delay in Deportation Process and Orders Inquiry into Illegal Immigration Racket
In a significant judgment dated September 29, 2026, the Jharkhand High Court, presided over by Justice Sanjay Prasad, dismissed the criminal appeal filed by Md. Najmul Hawaldar, a Bangladeshi national convicted for illegal entry and stay in India under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The appellant had pleaded guilty before the Sessions Court, which convicted him and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for two years along with a fine of Rs. 10,000. The High Court held that once a plea of guilty is recorded by a Sessions Court, no appeal lies against the conviction except on the legality or extent of the sentence, citing Section 416 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which parallels Sections 229 and 375 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The Court noted that the Trial Court had taken a lenient approach by imposing a two-year sentence where the maximum permissible punishment could extend up to eight years. Despite this, the appeal challenging conviction was not maintainable due to the plea of guilt by the appellant.
Furthermore, the Court expressed strong displeasure over the administrative delays in deporting the appellant following completion of his sentence on February 27, 2025. The appellant was transferred to a Holding Foreigners Camp for repatriation but escaped briefly, only to be re-arrested later. The Court highlighted the failure of both State and Union authorities in expeditiously processing deportation, which resulted in undue burden on the state resources and taxpayers.
The judgment also revealed that the Deputy High Commission of Bangladesh initially failed to verify the appellant's citizenship, submitting incorrect reports, which the Court criticized as deliberate suppression of facts. The Court directed all concerned authorities, including the Chief Secretaries and Directors General of Police of Jharkhand and West Bengal, as well as the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of External Affairs, to ensure compliance with deportation procedures and report by November 25, 2026.
In addition, the Court ordered an inquiry by the Superintendent of Police, Sahibganj, into individuals named Rahul and Md. Sagar, who were alleged to have facilitated the appellant's illegal entry and stay in India. These persons were suspected to be running a racket involving illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, concealing their identities from government and police authorities for monetary gains.
The Court underscored the importance of deterrence in cases of illegal immigration and emphasized that foreigners convicted of such offenses should not be allowed to misuse procedural delays to remain in India unlawfully. The judgment serves as a warning to illegal immigration facilitators and calls for prompt deportation measures to uphold the rule of law and safeguard public resources.
Bottom Line:
Criminal Appeal against conviction on plea of guilty is not maintainable except as to extent or legality of sentence; where accused pleaded guilty before Sessions Court for offence under Section 14A(b) of Foreigners Act, appeal under Section 415(2) BNSS was held barred by Section 416 BNSS. Court also directed expeditious deportation/repatriation of Bangladeshi national after noticing completion of sentence and administrative delay.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Sections 415, 416, 252; Foreigners Act, 1946 Section 14A(b); Criminal Procedure Code Sections 229, 375
