KASIFF SHAMSHUDDIN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners who have been convicted in C.C.Nos.19945/2017 and 20612/2017 by the Jurisdictional Magistrate in exercise of the power vested under Section 265-E of Cr.P.C. and under Section 241 of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 419, 465, 468, 472 and 511 and Section 14(a) to (c) of Foreigners Act and Section 5 of Foreigners Registration Act and have been imposed with sentence of imprisonment for the said offences are seeking for sentence so imposed to run concurrently in these two cases instead of consecutively. The higher sentence of imprisonment issued in each of these two cases is 21 months (1 year 9 months) and in both these cases, learned Magistrate has ordered that punishment so imposed should run concurrently. Petitioners in both these cases had sought for plea bargaining and had pleaded guilty. Accordingly, sentence came to be imposed in both the cases.

(2.) It is the fair submission of learned counsel appearing for petitioners that petitioners had entered the territory of India without any valid travel document or in other words their entry into the territory of this Country was by illegal means. The jurisdictional Police namely, Kumaraswamy Layout Police during interrogation, found that first petitioner had admitted that he had eloped from Pakistan with second petitioner and married her and has been residing at Bangalore without any valid documents. In other words, the illegal entry through which petitioners entered the territory of India had resulted in their apprehension and prosecution initiated against them under the Foreigners Registration Act and Indian Penal Code.

(3.) As noticed herein above, both petitioners had sought for plea bargaining and had pleaded guilty of the offences alleged against them in C.C.No.19945/2017 and C.C.No.20612/2017 respectively. Based on plea bargaining, sentences came to be imposed on petitioners in both cases.