Allahabad High Court Grants Bail to 6 Foreign nationals of Tablighi Jamaat.

Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court has granted bail to 6 Tablighi Jamaat Foreign Nationals, who are citizens of Kyrgyzstan.

These 6 persons had come to India to attend religious congregation organized by Tablighi Jamaat on 13 April 2020.

The applicants are foreign nationals who are in Jail since 18.04.2020. All the applicants are citizens of Kyrgyzstan and all of them have been accused of offences under Sections 188 I.P.C., Section 3 of Epidemic Disease Act, 1897, Section 12(3) of the Passport Act, 1967 and Sections 3(2) and Section 3 (3) Passports (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and Section 14/14-C of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. All the above applicants are accused in Case Crime No. 81 of 2020, Court says.

According to the First Information Report, the Administration on 22.03.2020 had imposed Section 144 C.r.P.C. within the area of Lucknow Commissionerate.

It is alleged that the same was widely publicized amongst the public. Information was received that in a Markaz Mosque situated at Dr. B. N. Verma Road within P.S. Kaiserbagh, District Lucknow, 6 foreign nationals who had entered India on a tourist Visa were being given shelter in the said mosque by its Manager namely Ali Hasan.

The aforesaid foreign nationals had attended the religious congregation at Nizamuddin in New Delhi and thereafter had come to Lucknow and without getting their medical examination done, they were residing in the Markaz Mosque.

It is also alleged that the Manager of the Mosque had given shelter to these foreign nationals for the purposes of propagating and disseminating religious discourse and these persons have violated the norms and were staying at one place.

It is also alleged that the local 3 police/Administration were not informed regarding these 6 foreign nationals.

The applicants were medically examined and on 31.03.2020 and they were kept at the Lok Bandu Hospital under 14 day’s quarantine under medical supervision.

It is alleged that the applicants have deliberately violated the Government Orders and have worked against the provisions of law and for the aforesaid they have been accused of having committed offence under the Sections as hereinabove mentioned.

The Counsel for Applicants Sri Priyanshu Agarwal has submitted that the applicants are absolutely innocent and merely by fortuitous circumstances have been implicated without any fault.

It has further been submitted that all the applicants are valid passport holders and were granted valid Visa to arrive in the territory of India. The applicants arrived at New Delhi on different dates and thereafter all the applicants reached Lucknow on 13.03.2020.

It is the specific case of the applicants that they had provided all the necessary details regarding their travel and stay within the territory of India including at Lucknow with the Foreigner Regional Registration 4 Office, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as FRRO), Lucknow which is under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

It is also submitted that the applicants arrived in Lucknow on 13.03.2020 and as per their disclosed programmes, they were to stay in Lucknow for a period of 22 days.

It is during this period that on 22.03.2020 initially a Janta Curfew was observed and thereafter the Government of India announced a National Lockdown due to which the movement of the applicants was completely restricted and they were confined to the place of their stay and could not more or travel out of Lucknow or even the Country and thus by circumstances the applicants were confined and because of certain perceptions against the members who attended the Markaz congregation at New Delhi, the applicants have been framed and various Sections have been imposed against the applicants even though they are completely innocent and are facing incarceration on foreign soil since 18.04.2020.

However appearing for the State Shri J.S.Tomar submitted that the

vehemently opposing the bail application has submitted that the applicants came to the Country under a tourist Visa.

A person who enters the territory of India under a tourist Visa is not entitled to participate or undertake any religious seminar or involve oneself in any religious discourses.

It has also been submitted that the applicants while being within the territory of India did not disclose that they attended the Markaz congregation at Nizamuddin in New Delhi and the fact that thereafter since some persons from the Markaz Congregation in New Delhi had tested positive of COVID-19 and various announcements were made on public platforms requiring all persons who had attended such a congregation to voluntarily come forward for testing for COVID-19 to contain the spread of virus but all the applicants did not come forward and they remained a threat to the society at large.

It has been further submitted by Sri Tomar that the applicants who are foreign nationals and having no permanent abode in India, hence, if the applicants are enlarged on bail, it will be difficult to keep a track and chances of them absconding and not being available for trial looms large, thus, under the aforesaid circumstances, it would be appropriate that the applicants are not enlarged on bail, coupled with the 7 fact that the investigation is still underway and the charge sheet has yet not been filed.

The Court in its orders as to whether in the facts and circumstances, the applicants are entitled to be granted bail; Court has stressed on the importance of the rights guaranteed to Citizens, non-citizen Under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

“Article 21 of the Constitution of India uses the word ‘personal liberty’. The addition of the word ‘personal’ before the word ‘liberty’ as used in Article 21 indicates that it is an anti-thesis of physical restrain or coercion. It is a basic right of an individual to be free from restrictions or encroachment on his person. Article 21 is often termed as the heart and soul of the fundamental rights as enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. Needless to mention that Article 21 guarantees every man whether he be a citizen of the country or a foreigner that he shall not be

deprived of his personal life and liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law.”

 While granting the bail Court said that:

Hence, this order shall be subject to the adherence of the said circular dated 14.04.2020. Let the applicants Sagynbek Toktobolotov, Sultanbek Tursunbaiuulu, Ruslan Toksobave, Zamirbek Maraliev, Aidyn Taldu 15 Kurgan @ Aidyn Kairbex & Dauren Taldu Kuragn @ Dauren Zhe Xenbekov involved in Case Crime No., 81 of 2020 under Sections 188 I.P.C., Section 3 of Epidemic Disease Act, 1897, Section 12 (3) of the Passport Act, 1967 and Sections 3 (2) and Section 3(3) of Passports (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and Section 14/14-C of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, Police StationKaiserbagh. District Lucknow be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each and one reliable solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and the following conditions are being imposed in the interest of justice.

• The applicants will not leave the country without prior written permission of the Court and shall furnish an undertaking to the said effect.
• Each applicant will also deposit a sum of Rs. for deposit of Rs. 11,000/- in the C.M. Covid-19 Relief Fund and shall submit a receipt in this regard before the Court concerned.
• Each applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
• Each applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
• In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence a proclamation or a look out notice be issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law.
• The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
•  

You May Also Read : NHRC Issues Notice To Delhi Govt And Union Health Ministry Over Serious Allegations About COVI 19,Mismanagement.10th June 2020

[Read Order]