Cuttack: Striking a balance between national sovereignty and the human cost of prolonged detention, the Orissa High Court has granted bail to a 50-year-old Bangladeshi national who has lived, worked, and raised a family in Aska, Ganjam district, for more than three decades.
Justice G Satapathy allowed the bail application of Abu Sahik @ Sahid @ Abu Saeid Howladar under Section 483 of the BNSS, noting the petitioner’s long integration into Indian society, his marriage to an Indian woman, and the absence of any allegation of terrorism or threat to national security.
The HC, however, stressed that bail does not legalise Abu Sahik’s stay in India, and that he remains fully subject to orders under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Abu Sahik entered India in 1991 as a young man of 20, and subsequently settled in Aska, ran a modest umbrella-repair business, and in 2001 married Tehera Banu, a local woman. Together they raised two sons and two daughters — some born before the 2003 amendment to the Citizenship Act. For years, he was simply the neighbourhood “umbrella-wallah” who had become part of the community. The family lived quietly until August 2025, when his origins came to light during interrogation. He was arrested in Aska PS Case No.514 of 2025 and has been in custody since September 5, 2025.
Senior Advocate Bibhu Prasad Tripathy, who argued for the petitioner, welcomed the order with a deeply humanistic appeal.
“For 35 long years, my client has lived, loved, and laboured on Indian soil. He married an Indian woman, raised four children who know no other country as home, and earned his bread through honest work. Today, his family — an Indian wife and children born and brought up here — has endured the pain of separation for nearly nine months. This is not just a legal battle; it is a human tragedy. We are grateful to the Hon’ble Court for recognising the human face behind the case. While we fully respect the sovereignty of our immigration laws, justice must also remember that behind every file is a family, a life, and years of quiet belonging,” Tripathy told reporters.
Landmark Guidelines Issued by the High Court
In a significant part of the judgment, Justice Satapathy laid down comprehensive guidelines for handling foreign nationals and illegal migrants across the state. These directions underscore a humane and procedurally fair approach:
Personal liberty extends to all persons: Article 21 of the Constitution protects the right to life and liberty of “any person” on Indian soil — citizens and non-citizens alike — and must be respected even in immigration cases.
Bail is possible but does not equal freedom of movement: Courts may grant bail in appropriate cases, but the grant does not authorise the foreigner to move freely; competent authorities under Section 3(2) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 retain full power to impose restrictions on residence, movement, reporting, and sureties, or to direct detention in a holding centre.
Immediate intimation to authorities: Whenever bail is granted to a foreign national/illegal migrant, the trial court must promptly inform the competent authority under the Foreigners Act so that appropriate orders can be passed to ensure the person’s availability during trial and eventual deportation.
Humane conditions in holding centres: Women and children must be treated with dignity in line with Supreme Court guidelines in R.D. Upadhaya v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2007) 15 SCC 337. The State is urged to adopt the Model Detention Centre/Holding Centre Manual, 2019 and prepare its own SOPs for food, shelter, medical care and basic amenities.
Speedy justice: Cases involving foreign nationals must be investigated and tried expeditiously so that prolonged detention does not become punishment before conviction.
Post-trial procedure: If acquitted and nationality remains disputed, the person shall not be kept in jail but may be shifted to a holding centre pending deportation; if convicted, sentence must be served, after which deportation follows.
The court directed that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Chief Secretary, Home Department and DGP, Odisha, for strict compliance. Odisha already operates 21 holding centres (including one in Ganjam district at Chatrapur).
For Tehera Banu and her children, the bail order brings a ray of hope after months of uncertainty. As Tripathy poignantly observed, “The law must protect the nation, but it must also protect the dignity of ordinary human beings who have woven their lives into the Indian tapestry.”
The petitioner is expected to be released shortly upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties and complying with all conditions.
