The present bail application is filed under Section 439, Cr.P.C. by the sole accused of a criminal case in Crime No.602/15 registered by K.R.Puram police station, Bengaluru, on 1.10.2015.

2. Initially the case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506, I.P.C. After concluding investigation, charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506, I.P.C. and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

3. Learned SPP representing the State has vehemently opposed bail on the ground that prima facie case is forthcoming in regard to the criminal intimidation of the first informant, a lady by name Ms.Sai Kumari by this petitioner and committing rape on her. It is argued that the petitioner is a foreign national belonging to the Federal Republic of Nigeria and has overstayed here in Bengaluru, though his visa obtained under the category ‘medical attendant’ expired on 13.4.2013. He has requested this court to take a serious view of the gross violation of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, Foreigners Order, 1948 and Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939. Hence he seeks dismissal of the bail application.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Nagaraje Gowda. He has submitted that no prima facie case is forthcoming in regard to the offence of rape alleged against the petitioner and that the maximum punishment contemplated for the offence punishable under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, can extend up to 5 years of imprisonment and also liable to fine, and is exclusively triable by the JMFC Court-V. Therefore, he requests this court to take a lenient view. He has submitted that his client would undertake to abide by any condition which may be imposed upon him. It is his case that Section 376, I.P.C. is absolutely not applicable to the facts of this case, and at the best, it would amount to breach of promise to marry punishable under Section 417, I.P.C.

5. Since the Foreigners Act dealing with foreign nationals staying in India is attracted, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to implead the Union of India as respondent no.2. Accordingly Union of India is impleaded. Mr.Krishna S.Dixit, Additional Solicitor General has taken notice of the petition and has submitted arguments at length, adverting to various facets of the present case in the light of serious violation of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946, Passports Act and other allied legislations and statutory orders. He is assisted by Sri Ganesh, Foreign Regional Registration Officer.

6. Similarly Mr.Ponnanna, learned Addl. Advocate General has submitted his arguments on behalf of the State. His attention was drawn to the number of foreign nationals overstaying in Bengaluru and non-establishment of a detention centre in the city so as to enable foreign nationals to be detained till they are deported to their respective countries, after the expiry of visa.

7. This court also drew the attention of the learned Addl. Advocate General and learned SPP to the number of cases registered and investigated for the offences punishable under the Foreigners Act and relevant Acts and pendency of cases before courts at Bengaluru and delay in regard to the same.

8. Sri Krishna S.Dixit, learned Addl. Solicitor General has submitted a list of foreigners overstaying in Bengaluru City nationwise. He has submitted that in fact police as well as the Government of India have been soft towards foreign nationals staying here in spite of their long and unjustified overstay in Bengaluru and other parts of the state and that the same must not be misused by them (foreign nationals) in any manner either by violating the provisions of the Passports Act or Foreigners Act or other penal statutes of the state or country.

9. Mr.Ponnanna has brought to the notice of this court few cases in which the trial courts have imposed fleabite sent