The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish charges beyond all reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the accused's nationality and the location of apprehension within Indian territory. The admissibility of evidence, especially the sketch map prepared on the basis of hearsay evidence, was also a key legal principle.

1. Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the appellant and also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.

2. This appeal, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.06.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri, in Sessions Case No. 52/2021. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order dated 03.06.2023, the learned Court below has convicted the appellant under Section 14-A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation and also convicted him under Section 489C IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation and further directed that sentence on both count shall run concurrently.

3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present criminal appeal, are briefly stated as under:

“On 26.06.2021, at around 21:00 hours, Commander of “A” Coy 67 BN BSF Bop-Tistarpar, acting on a tip off, along with other staff including ASI Abadus Sabor, I/C, Solmari Patrol Post and two others Assam police personnel apprehended one person, namely, Kalam Ali, who hails from Bangladesh side, near BP No. 1030/3S, near the IB and found Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN) of Rs. 49,500/- of Rs. 500/- denomination and seized the same preparing seizure list. Thereafter, the Constable (BSF) Dilip Kumar had lodged one FIR to that effect with the Officer-in-Charge, Dhubri P.S., upon which the Officer-in-Charge, Dhubri P.S. registered a case, being Dhubri P.S. Case No. 1024/2021, dated 27.06.2021, under Sections 120B/489A/489B/489C IPC, read with Section 6/10 of the Passport Act and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act and endorsed S.I. Mahidul Zaman to investigate the case. The I.O. then visited the place of occurrence, examined the witnesses and prepared sketch map of the place of occurrence and seized the fake Indian currency notes of Rs. 49,500/- by preparing seizure list and thereafter, forwarded the same to the Director, FSL for examination and thereafter, collected the report. Then on completion of investigation, the I.O. laid charge-sheet, being Charge-Sheet No. 1024/2021, dated 27.06.2021 against the appellant Kalam Ali to stand trial in the Court under Sections 120B/489A/489B/489C IPC, read with Section 14 of the Foreigners Act and Section 6(A) of the Passport Act.

On commitment of the case, to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri the learned Sessions Judge, after hearing learned Advocates of both the parties, had framed charges against the appellant under Section 489A/489B/489C IPC, read with Section 14-A(b) of the Foreigners Act and Section 12(1)(c) of the Passport Act and on being read and explain over the same to the appellant, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Thereafter, the learned Court below had examined as many as 7 witnesses and also exhibited 6 documents and thereafter, closing the prosecution evidence the learned Court below had examined the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, hearing learned Advocates of both the parties, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.”

4. Being highly aggrieved, the appellant has approached this Court by filing this criminal appeal for setting aside the impugned judgment and order on the following grounds:

(i) That, the learned Court below has committed grave error of law as well as of facts in convicting the appellant and sentencing him vide impugned judgment and order dated 03.06.2023.

(ii) That, the learned Court below, without scrutinizing the entire materials on record, proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant.

(iii) That, no ingredients of the offence under Section 14-A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 is established here in this case and as such, conviction of the appellant under the said Section is not sustainable.

(iv)