JUDGMENT : The instant writ application has been preferred, inter alia, praying for consideration of the petitioner’s claim towards grant of registration as a citizen of India and for a direction to release the petitioner from custody in the Midnapore Correctional Home. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that the petitioner along with his family members left East Pakistan before the “Mukti Juddha” in the year 1970 and took shelter in India, when he was only 12 years of age. Since then the petitioner is residing in the district of Midnapore along with his family members. On 4th October, 1991 the petitioner got married and such marriage was duly registered. Out of the said wedlock two sons were born who are presently aged about 13 years and 21 years. On 30th June, 1998 the petitioner was gifted a plot of land upon which he constructed a thatched house. The said deed of gift was also registered before the competent authority. On proper application the petitioner has been issued Ration Card, Aadhaar Card and Voters Identity Card. The petitioner also made an application towards grant of registration as a citizen of India. As the said representation was kept pending, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court earlier by a writ application, being W. P. No. 19496 (W) of 2003 and the same was disposed of by this Court on 1st April, 2004 directing the respondent no.3 to consider the petitioner’s application and to pass a reasoned order. The petitioner’s repeated representations thereafter were not attended to by the respondents and almost five years thereafter, the petitioner was asked to attend a hearing in the office of the respondent no.3 on 11th September, 2009. Thereafter the petitioner was served a copy of a memorandum dated 10th January, 2012 by which the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Home Department sought for some instruction from the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs. Till date the petitioner’s application has not been disposed of by the competent authority. Thereafter the petitioner was served a copy of a memorandum dated 10th January, 2012 by which the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Home Department sought for some instruction from the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs. Till date the petitioner’s application has not been disposed of by the competent authority. In the midst thereof, an enquiry was conducted by the police authorities and alleging that the petitioner is a citizen of Bangladesh and has entered into this country without valid documents, a First Information Report was lodged and on the basis of the same a prosecution under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act was launched against the petitioner being G.R. Case No.08 of 1983 and a final order was passed in the same on 26th June, 1992 sentencing him to suffer a simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs.200/- and it was also directed that after expiry of the period of sentence, the petitioner be repatriated to Bangladesh under proper escort. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the statutory appellate forum but the said appeal was rejected and against such order of rejection the petitioner preferred a criminal revisional application before this Court being Criminal Revision No. 1319 of 1992. By an order dated 30th March, 1997 this Court was pleased to set aside the sentence and imprisonment, barring the sentence undergone by him. The petitioner, thereafter, renewed his prayer for registration as a citizen of India by issuing a letter dated 3rd of January, 2004. On 26th of February, 2015, the petitioner was again taken into custody in connection with G.R. Case No.8 of 1983 and ultimately by an order dated 26th February, 2016 bail was refused. The Court observed that necessary arrangement may be taken for repatriating him to Bangladesh as there was no specific order as to the stay of pushback. 3. In course of hearing, Mr. Sanyal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of the Foreigners Act, Passport Act (Entry into India), 1920 have been amended and in view of such submissions, Mr. Singh, learned advocate appearing for the Union of India was requested to produce the relevant circulars. In response thereto, Mr. Singh has placed before this Court an affidavit affirmed by the Under-Secretary to the Government of India. Singh, learned advocate appearing for the Union of India was requested to produce the relevant circulars. In response thereto, Mr. Singh has placed before this Court an affidavit affirmed by the Under-Secretary to the Government of India. A perusal of the said affidavit reveals that by a notification dated 7th September, 2015 the Foreigners (Amendment) Order, 2015 was promulgated and by a notification of the self-same date, the Passport (Entry into India) Amendment Rules, 2015 were brought into effect. 4. Placing reliance upon the said circulars, Mr. Sanyal, learned advocate, submits that in view of the notifications dated 7th September, 2015 and as the proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on a purported ground that he entered into Indian Territory of India without any valid documents and as the petitioner was compelled to take shelter in India due to religious persecution on or before the 31st December, 2014, the petitioner stands exempted from the application of the Foreigners Act and that as such the order of conviction against the petitioner does not survive. In view of the said circulars, the petitioner is entitled to exemption from the provisions of the Foreigners Act and that as such there can be no bar towards consideration of the petitioner’s application for registration as a citizen of India and in the said conspectus the present detention of the petitioner is illegal. 5. Mr. Singh, learned advocate appearing for the Union of India submits that the petitioner did make an application for registration as a citizen of Indian to the Government of West Bengal (Home Department) and the said government sent a letter on 10th January, 2012 but without the relevant documents and as a consequence thereof, the petitioner’s application could not be disposed of. 6. As regards the petitioner’s subsequent representation to the Central Government, Mr. Singh submits that the same was issued at a wrong address and as such the same could not be considered. However, Mr. Singh submits that in view of the present amendments brought into force on and from 8th September, 2015, the petitioner’s prayer for registration as a citizen of India can be considered by the Central Government. In support of such contention, Mr. Singh has drawn the averments made in the affidavit affirmed by the Under-Secretary. 7. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and I have considered the materials on record. 8. In support of such contention, Mr. Singh has drawn the averments made in the affidavit affirmed by the Under-Secretary. 7. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and I have considered the materials on record. 8. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner is residing in India for a period of more than 44 years. Presently, he is also an owner of an immovable property and is residing with his entire family in the district of Medinipur. His marriage has also been registered and he has also been issued Ration Card, Aadhaar Card and Voters Identity Card issued by the competent authority. The Central Government also brought into effect amendments in the Foreigners Order, 1948 and in the Passport (Entry into India) Rules. A perusal of the same reveals that the said circulars, inter alia, provides that in the event the person concerned has entered into India without valid documents or with valid documents, the validity of which has expired, would be exempted from the provisions of the Foreigners Act. It is true that the High Court, in exercise of its power of judicial review should not ordinarily interfere with the proceedings before the criminal forum. But in the event it is found that the fundamental right of a foreigner pertaining to life and liberty stands affected, the Writ Court can certainly issue appropriate directions. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is staying in India since 1970. It is difficult to believe that a man whose relation including his wife and children are residing in India and who has property in India will abscond. There should be a human approach to the matter. It is a pity that the petitioner has faced judicial anomalies from the very beginning. The petitioner’s application for registration as a citizen of India has also been kept in abeyance for an indefinite period in spite of order passed by this Court way back in the year 2004. 9. The Central Government is the competent authority to determine the issue of citizenship. Such decision of the Central Government about the status of a person is to be decided first and it is only after such decision is taken by the competent authority, steps can be taken for deportation/repatriation of the petitioner to Bangladesh. 10. 9. The Central Government is the competent authority to determine the issue of citizenship. Such decision of the Central Government about the status of a person is to be decided first and it is only after such decision is taken by the competent authority, steps can be taken for deportation/repatriation of the petitioner to Bangladesh. 10. The petitioner is, accordingly, directed to fill up all the prescribed forms and to submit the same along with all relevant documents before the respondent no.3 within a period of 6 weeks from date. On receipt of such application, appropriate steps should be taken by the said respondent no.3 and such application along with a report should be forwarded to the Central Government by the respondent no.3, within the period as stipulated under the statutes and within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the relevant documents and report from the respondent no.3, the Under-Secretary to the Ministry of Home Affairs (Citizenship Section) shall take a final decision and communicate the same to the petitioner. It is made clear that the period as stipulated above for the petitioner to submit the prescribed forms along with relevant documents to the respondent no.3 is mandatory. 11. In the said conspectus of facts and the reasons discussed above and in view of the present amendments as brought into effect on and from 8th September, 2015, this Court directs that the execution of the order of repatriation/deportation passed against the petitioner shall remain suspended till the petitioner’s application for registration as citizen of India is disposed of by the competent authority. 12. In the facts of the case and subject to compliance of the directives towards submission of the prescribed forms and relevant documents by the petitioner to the respondent no.2, as indicated above, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned Magistrate, who after consideration of all the facts, may consider the question of his bail, on any condition, he thinks best. 13. With the above observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. 14. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.