The revision petitioner- accused in C.C.No.52935/2021

on the file of XI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall,

Bengaluru (herein after referred to as 'the Trial Court' for

brevity), is impugning the judgment of conviction and order of

sentence dated 16.07.2021, convicting him for the offence

punishable under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act and

sentencing him to undergo S.I. for 30 days and pay fine of

Rs.10,000/- with default sentence; under Section 51(b) of the

Disaster Management Act and sentenced to undergo S.I. for

one month and pay fine of Rs.500/- with default sentence and

also under Section 188 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I.

for 15 days and pay fine of Rs.200/- with default sentence,

which was confirmed vide judgment dated 08.02.2023 in

Crl.A.No.25134/2021 by learned XXVIII Addl. City Civil &

Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, (hereinafter referred to

as ' First Appellate Court').

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the accused is a

foreigner came to India for educational purpose i.e., for

pursuing his degree in Business Administration, since 2017-18.

During COVID-19 Pandemic, when several restrictions and

- 3 -

curfew was imposed on the movement and activities of the

citizens in public places, it is stated that the accused in the

company of other accused persons was found smoking Hookah

and cigarette, shouting by disobeying the restriction and curfew

order, found partying in restaurant which was not having valid

licence and thereby disturbing public peace and tranquility.

During investigation, it was found that the accused was not

having valid VISA as on the date of the incident and he was

overstaying in India. Thereby he has committed offence

punishable under Sections 51(b) of the Disaster Management

Act and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act and Section 188 of the

IPC. Accordingly, charge sheet came to be filed.

3. The petitioner/accused appeared before the trial

Court in response to the summons, represented by his

advocate and pleaded guilty for the charges levelled against

him. One Sri. N.C.R., advocate was representing the accused

and he has filed required application by submitting that the

accused is going to admit his guilt for all the aforesaid offences.

Thereafter, the advocate and accused were heard by the

learned Magistrate, satisfied with the plea of guilty by the

accused and he was convicted for the aforesaid offences and

- 4 -

sentenced him as stated above. Later the accused challenged

the impugned order of conviction and sentence before the First

Appellate Court by preferring Crl.A.No.25134/2021.

4. The first Appellate Court on re-appreciation of the

materials on record and the contentions of the parties,

dismissed the application and confirmed the impugned

judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the

trial Court. Being aggrieved by the same, accused is before this

Court.

5. Heard

Sri.

Nawman

Shariff,

learned

counsel

appearing for Sri. C Shankar Reddy, counsel for the petitioner

and Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP for the respondent-

State. Perused the material including the Trial Court records.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the accused is a foreigner, who is the citizen of Sate of YEMEN.

He came to India on educational VISA during 2017-18 and was

pursuing

his

degree

in

Business

Administration

in

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar

Institute

of

Management

Studies,

Indiranagar, Bengaluru. He was having valid Passport and VISA

and he has not committed any offence. However, he was

mislead by his advocate to plead guilty and accordingly accused

- 5 -

has pleaded guilty. Therefore, the impugned order of conviction

and sentence passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside.

7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader

opposing the revision petition submitted that the accused was

represented by his advocate, pleaded guilty before the learned

Magistrate, who recorded his plea after satisfying himself that

the accused voluntarily pleaded gu