Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tri) 289
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
Sharmin Akter – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tripura – Respondent
Crl.A(J) 87 / 2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Sentencing and Repatriation
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The appellant, a foreign national, challenged a conviction and sentence for unlawful entry and a related offence. During the appellate process, the government indicated no objection to the removal and repatriation of the appellant to their home country instead of continuing incarceration.
Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the appellant's status as a female first-time offender and noted the potential suffering of the family. Exercising its discretion, the court modified the custodial sentence to the duration of imprisonment already served and directed the relevant authorities to facilitate the individual's repatriation.
Issues: Whether the court could modify a custodial sentence to facilitate the repatriation of a foreign national convicted of illegal entry, in light of the official consent from the government.
Ratio Decidendi: In cases involving foreign nationals, particularly female first-time offenders, the court may adopt a humanitarian approach by modifying the imposed term of imprisonment to the period already undergone, provided that the responsible government authorities waive objection to the repatriation of the individual.
Result: Appeal disposed of; conviction upheld but sentence modified to time served; authorities directed to facilitate repatriation.
Page 1 of 3
( 2026:THC:610 )
TRHC010019722025
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl. A(J) 87 of 2025
Sharmin Akter,
wife of Rajib Khan,
Of- Kanaipur, P.O. Kutalipara, P.S. Faridpur
Dist.- Faridpur, Bangladesh
……Convict- Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura
.......Respondent
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Arjun Acharjee, Advocate
Ms. Moon Basu, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
Mr. R. Saha, Addl. P.P.
Date of hearing & delivery
of Judgment & order : 14.05.2026.
Whether fit for reporting : No ____________
HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)
[1] This present appeal is filed under Section 415 of BNSS against the
impugned order of conviction and sentence dated 04-06-2025 passed by
learned Sessions Judge, Dhalai District, Ambassa in case No. S.T(Type-II) 04
of 2025 whereby and where under the appellant has been convicted under
Section 336 (3) of BNS, 2023 and sentenced her to suffer simple imprisonment
for 5 (five) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) for the same
offence, in default to pay fine, to suffer S.I. for further 6 (six) months and the
##PAGE2##Page 2 of 3
appellant has been further convicted under section 3(3) of passport (Entry into
India) Act, 1920 and sentenced her to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 (two)
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) for the same offence, in
default to pay fine, to suffer S.I. for further 6 (six) months.
[2] By filing the present appeal, the appellant has sought for the
following reliefs:
“i) Admit this appeal,
ii) Call for the record,
iii) Issue notice upon the respondent, and
iv) After hearing the parties be pleased enough to set aside the impugned
Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 04-06-2025 passed by ******
Ld. Sessions Judge, Dhalai District, Ambassa in case No. S.T(Type-II) 04 of
2025 whereby and where under the appellant has been convicted U/S 336 (3)
of BNS, 2023 and sentenced her to suffer R.I. for 5 (five) years and to pay a
fine of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) for the same offence, in default to pay fine,
she shall suffer S.I. for further 6 (six) months and the appellant has been
further convicted under section 3(3) of passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920
and sentenced her to suffer R.I. for 2 (two) years and to pay a fine of Rs.
10,000/-(ten thousand) for the same offence, in default to pay fine, she shall
suffer S.I. for further 6 (six) months.……..……………”
[3] Today, when the case is called, Mr. Raju Datta, learned P.P. has
placed before this Court a letter dated 08.01.2026 issued by the Under
Secretary, Government of Tripura, Home Department addressed to learned
Addl. P.P., High Court of Tripura informing that the department does not have
any objection if this Court directs to push back the appellant to her own country
i.e. Bangladesh instead of keeping her in jail to serve imprisonment in
compliance of judgment dated 04.06.2025 of the Court of learned Sessions
Judge, Dhalai District, Ambassa in case No. ST (T-II) 04 of 2025. The said
letter be kept on record.
[4] The relevant contents of the said letter dated 08.01.2026 issued by
the Under Secretary, Government of Tripura, Home Department, are
reproduced as under:
“……I am directed to refer to your case file bearing No.28 of 2025 in
connection with the Crl. Appeal (1) No.87 of 2025 (Sharmin Aktar -Vs- the
State of Tripura) and Crl. Appeal (J) No.86 of 2025 (Sriti Khatun -Vs- the
##PAGE3##Page 3 of 3
State of Tripura) and to inform you that the department does not have any
objection if the Hon'ble Court directs to push back the convict persons to
their own country i.e. Bangladesh Instead of keeping them in jail to serve
imprisonment in compliance of judgment dated 04.06.2025 of the Ld. Court
of Sessions Judge, Dhalal District, Ambassa in case No.ST(T-II) 04 of 2025
(The State of Tripura -Vs- Sriti Khatum & Anr.)….”
[5] Upon hearing the submissions made at the Bar and on perusal of
record, this Court is of the opinion that since the appellant is a female person
and in the absence of the appellant her family i
