Judgment :- Toufique Uddin, J. This appeal surfaced under the caption ‘To be Mentioned’ at serial no. 2 of day’s list. But none moves. Seen the office report. It shows that the appellant one Mizanur Rahaman, being a Bangladeshi, has submitted an application, duly forwarded by the Superintendent, Berhampore Central Correctional Home, Murshidabad, with a prayer of withdrawal of the appeal. W hy the appellant has prayed for withdrawal of the appeal is not clear from the contents of his prayer. On perusal I find this appeal require to be disposed of on merit and accordingly it is done as follows:- The appellant is reported to be a Bangladeshi and he attempted to cross the border to sneak into Indian Territory. On being challenged by the B.S.F. personnel, he could not justify his entry and presence in the Indian Territory. After investigation, Police submitted charge-sheet. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions by the Magistrate. On hearing both sides, the learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused person. The contents of the charges were read over and explained to the accused person who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To contest the case, prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses while none was examined from the side of the defence. The defence case as appeared from the trend of cross-examination of the witnesses and the replies given by the accused person is denial of offence with a plea of innocence. On trial, the learned Court below convicted the appellant by the judgment dated 29.07.2010. Being aggrieved by the said finding of the Court below, the appellant while remaining in Berhampore Central Correctional Home, submitted a petition for appointment of an Advocate at the cost of the State. Accordingly, State Legal Service Authority provided him with an Advocate from State Panel. On hearing of both sides, by the impugned judgment, the appellant was convicted. Having a glance of the judgment, it is clear that the appellant is a Bangladeshi national who could not justify his presence in Indian Territory and taking all aspects into consideration, the Trial Court by a speaking order held the present appellant guilty under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years with a privilege of set off. This being the position, I find no ground to interfere with the findings of the learned Court below. Therefore, the appeal stands dismissed on merit. Let a copy of the judgment be sent down to the Court below immediately.