Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Firoz Saikh Firoj Seikh Saddam, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 June, 2025
Author: K Suresh Reddy
Bench: K Suresh Reddy
=¥`
`-- ¢JZ-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR
THURSDAY ,T~,HE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
AND
THE HONouRABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
IA No.2 OF2025
lN
CRLA NO: 300 OF 2025
Between:
1. Firoz Saikh @ Firoj Seikh @ Saddam, S/o RaJ'abuI Saikh, Muslim,
Indian, Aged 27 years, R/o Kumbhira Village, Baishnabnagar P.S.,
. Malda District, West Bengal State.
2. TajamuI Saikh @ Bhoot', S/o Ajijiul SaI'kh @ Aijul Sk, Muslim, Indian,
Aged 35 years, R/o Mohanpur (Angh), Chamatola Baishnanagar P.S.,
Malda District West Bengal State.
...Petitioners/Appellants/Accused Nos.3 & 4
(Petitioner in CRLA 300 OF 2025
on the fI-Ie of High Court)
AND
1. State ofAndhra Pradesh, (Inspector of Police, NIA) Rep, by its Special
Public Prosecutor, Hl'gh Court ofA.P., Amaravathi.
... Respondent/Respondent/COmplainant
(Respondents in-do-)
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI POSANI AKASH
Counsel for the RespondentiDEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
petition under section 430(1) Bharatiya Nagirk Suraksha Sanhita,
2023praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of
the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the sentence of
imprisonment imposed against the petitioners herein (A3 and A4) I-n
The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondents herein tO
show cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the
following order.(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt Of
notice in the case).
ORDER
f{The present application is filed by the petitioners/appellants/A.3 & A.4 under Section 430(1) Bharatiya Nagirk Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking their release on bail by suspending the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the learned Ill Additional District and Sessions Judge - Gum - Special Judge for NIA Cases, Visakhapatnam, vide Sessions Case Nos.13 AND 10 of 2o23, dated 21.03.2025, pending the present Criminal Appeal before this Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners/A.3 & A.4 contends that the lst petitioner/A.3 was convicted under Section 489-B IPC a;nd was 'sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of.seven years and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default,1:o suffer simple imprisonment for 21/2 years. So far as the 2nd petitioner/A.4 is concerned, he was convicted under Section 489-B IPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of seven years and a]§o to pay fine of Rs.10,000/I, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 21/2 years. The 2nd petitioner/A.4 was further convicted under Section 120-B IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of Seven years and also to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 years. The 2nd petitioner/A.4 was also further convicted under section 201 lPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of two years and also to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer sjmp[e irT)PrjSOnment for Six months. The 2nd petitioner/A|4 was further convicted under Section 204 IPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of two years and also to pay fine of Rs.2`,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six mon1:h's|
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that the lst petitioner/A.3 has already undergone six (06) months of imprisonment. so far as the 2nd petitioner/A.4 is concerned, he has already undergone more than 31/2-years Of imprisonment. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that during pendency of the trial, both the petitioners were on bail and after conviction only they were sent to Jail. He further contends that during pendency of the trial,I both the petitioners have not involved in any other similar crimes. As such, he requests this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
4. On the other hand, Sri P.Punna Rao, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India filed the counter. Paragraph No.7 of the counter reads as follows:-
ff7. During the course of further investigation, it was revealed that Tajamul Saikh @ Bhoot (A.4) is a habitual offender involved in the trafficking of Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN). There are previous crimihal cases registered against him, namely : (1) FIR No.457/2011, dated 21.ll.2011, under Sections 120-B, 489-B and 489-C IPC, registered at New Market/STF Police Station, Kolkata, West Bengal; and (2) FIR No.03/CL/IMP/F[CN/DRI/GAU/2015-16, da1:ed 16|0912015, registered by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence ,(DRI), Guwahati Regional Unit. Furthermore, the said accused is a permanent resident of West Bengal, which shares an international border with Bangladesh. Owing to his proximity to the border and his criminal background, there exists a substantial risk' of the accused abs.conding and fleeing 1:he countery. Should this occur, it would be extremely difficult to secure his presence before the Court and undergoing-sentence."
5. 'This Court perused the entire material on record.
.` ll
~f
6. As the petitioners were released on bail during pendency of the trial and as the sentence imposed against the petitioners is only seven years, we are inclined to enlarge 1:hem on bail by suspending the sentence of imprisonment alone imposed by the learned Sessions Judge pending the present Criminal Appeal.
7. The petitl-oners/appeIIants/A.3 & A.4 are, therefore, directed to be released on bail on 1:heir executing a personal bond for Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two (02) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Ill Additional District Judge -Gum
-Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Visakhapatnam.
8. Further, as there are other cases are pend]-ng against the petitioners, the petitioners/appeIIants/A.3 & A.4 are directed not to leave the country and further directed to report before the Station House Officer, New Market/STF Police Station, Kolkatta, West Bengal State, once in a month i.e.,1st day of every succeeding month between 10.00 A.M. and 1.00 P.M. The petitioners/appeIIants/A.3 & A.4 are also directed to appear before this court whenever the case stands posted for hearing.
9. Accordingly, with the above directi'ons, this application is allowed."
SD/- M.SRINIVAS-I I ASsS:ScTT:ON:2fficsETRRAR ;i;:#i#:.I //TRUE COPY// For /.
To,
1. The Ill Additional District Judge-Gum-Special Judge for NIA Cases, Visakhapatnam
2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam
3. One CC to SRl. POSANI AKASH Advocate [OPUC]
4. One CC to DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OPUC]
5. One spare copy HIGH COURT DATED..19/06/2025 ORDER IA No. 2 OF2025 IN CRLA NO: 300 OF 2025 •€A jiJ ±SSqTG\E iT €ar€¥f 1 i JuNan5 THIS APPLICATION IS ALLOWED