Court holds that criminal proceedings initiated by illegal immigrants against petitioner who reported their unlawful stay are abuse of process; orders constitution and operationalisation of District Level Committees under Standard Operating Procedure for illegal immigration.
In a significant judgment dated 16th October 2026, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, quashed two criminal cases registered against Sri Nagendrappa T., a medical practitioner and social activist, who had reported the presence of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh residing unlawfully in Bengaluru. The Court found that the complaints lodged by the illegal immigrants against the petitioner were retaliatory in nature and amounted to an abuse of the criminal justice system.
The petitioner had informed the police about a group of Bangladeshi nationals living illegally in makeshift labour sheds near a government school in Kodathi Village, Sarjapur Main Road. Following his complaint, the police arrived at the spot, causing some of the illegal immigrants to flee. Subsequently, two FIRs were registered against Sri Nagendrappa: one at Bellanduru Police Station (Crime No. 343 of 2026) and another at Varthur Police Station (Crime No. 488 of 2026), accusing him of assault, wrongful restraint, and intimidation.
The Court meticulously examined the timeline and facts surrounding these complaints. It noted that the complainants themselves disclosed Bangladeshi addresses and lacked valid documents authorizing their stay in India, as confirmed by contemporaneous communications from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO). Strikingly, the complaints against the petitioner were lodged immediately after the authorities began taking action against the complainants for their illegal stay, indicating a retaliatory motive.
Drawing upon the principles laid down in the landmark Supreme Court case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the High Court held that where allegations are inherently improbable and criminal proceedings are instituted with mala fide intent to wreak vengeance, the Court's extraordinary jurisdiction can be exercised to quash such proceedings. The Court emphasized that while every person in India is entitled to protection under criminal law, this protection cannot be misused to harass those who expose unlawful activities.
The Court further expressed concern over the misuse of the criminal justice system to shield illegal immigrants from lawful proceedings and to intimidate citizens who discharge their civic duty by reporting such illegal presence. It observed that allowing such retaliatory complaints to proceed would erode public confidence in the administration of justice.
Besides quashing the criminal cases against the petitioner, the Court directed the State Government of Karnataka to ensure strict compliance with the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) dated 2nd May 2025 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs concerning detection, identification, detention, and deportation of illegal immigrants. The SOP mandates the constitution of Special Task Forces and District Level Committees in every district for prompt and lawful action against illegal migrants.
The Court ordered the State to constitute and operationalize these District Level Committees within three months and mandated the submission of a detailed district-wise compliance report evidencing the constitution, composition, and functioning of these committees. It underscored that the SOP is not a mere executive proclamation but a vital framework for safeguarding national security, demographic integrity, and the rule of law.
The judgment also highlighted the broader constitutional and security implications of illegal immigration, referencing Supreme Court precedents such as Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India and Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha v. Union of India, which recognize unchecked illegal immigration as a threat to internal security and constitutional governance.
The learned Additional Solicitor General of India, representing FRRO, confirmed that the complainants were under movement restriction orders and that proceedings for their deportation were underway in accordance with the SOP.
This ruling is a landmark in balancing the enforcement of immigration laws and protecting citizens from vexatious litigation. It affirms that the criminal process cannot be weaponized by unlawful residents to silence lawful informants and reinforces the State's obligation to implement lawful mechanisms for managing illegal immigration.
Bottom Line:
Criminal proceedings initiated by illegal immigrants against a citizen-informant, immediately after he reported their unlawful stay, were held to be retaliatory and an abuse of process; FIRs were quashed under Bhajan Lal principles. State was further directed to constitute and operationalise District Level Committees under the SOP for detection and deportation of illegal immigrants.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 74, 79, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352; Constitution of India, Article 226; Citizenship Act, 1955 Section 2(1)(b); Foreigners Act, 1946 Sections 3(2)(c), 3(2)(e), 14, 14A(b); Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 Section 4; Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 Sections 7(2), 13, 29.
Sri Nagendrappa T. v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3001816
