JUDGMENT (Prayer: This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. to call for the entire records in connection with S.C.No.26 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court at Tiruppur and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Learned Principal Sessions Court at Tiruppur in S.C.No.26 of 2019 dated 15.12.2022.) 1. The criminal appeal has been filed to call for the entire records in connection with S.C.No.26 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court at Tiruppur and set aside the same. 2. The fact of the case is that this appellant is the 7th accused in S.C.No.26 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur. The appellant/ 7th accused is Bangladesh Nationals. On 09.11.2018, this appellant (A7) with other Bangladesh National persons were found to be residing at Sevvanthanpalayam, Kunnagalpalayam and Pazhavanjipalayam of Tiruppur Town without having valid identity for their entry to India and for stay as mandate under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Thereby, the appellant (A7) along with other Bangladesh National persons (A1 to A6 & A8) had committed the offence punishable under Section 3(1) r/w Section 14 (c) of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Therefore, the respondent police prosecuted the accused persons A1 to A8 for having committed an offence under Section 3(1) r/w Section 14(c) of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Further, the other accused persons A9 and A11 are operators Authorized by Unique Identification Authority of India, who prepared Aadhaar cards and A10 & A12 are agents for A1 to A8 to get the documents from A9 & A11. Hence, they are also prosecuted by the respondent police for the offences under Sections 42 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 r/w 109 IPC and 417 r/w 109 IPC. After filing the final report, the case has been taken on file in S.C.No.26 of 2019 by the trial Court. At the time of framing of charges, the Bangladesh Nationals (Foreigners) A1 to A6 and A8 admitted their offence. Therefore, the case against the accused persons A1 to A6 and A8 was split up as S.C.No.66 of 2019 by order dated 03.09.2019. 3. At the time of framing of charges, the Bangladesh Nationals (Foreigners) A1 to A6 and A8 admitted their offence. Therefore, the case against the accused persons A1 to A6 and A8 was split up as S.C.No.66 of 2019 by order dated 03.09.2019. 3. The trial Court, on admission of crime by the accused persons in S.C.No.66 of 2019 (A1 to A6 & A8), had convicted them for the offence under Section 3(1) r/w Section 14(c) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and under Section 42 of Aadhaar Act, 2016 directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months and under Section 417 IPC directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months. The period already undergone by them was ordered to be set off by ordering the sentence to run concurrently. Each accused person was directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. 4. The case in S.C.No.26 of 2019 was separately dealt with as against the appellant (A7) and the accused persons A9 to A12. Since they denied charges, a trial was conducted. In the trial Court, the prosecution examined ten witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.10 and marked eighty three documents as Exs.P1 to P83 and produced thirty one material objects M.O.1 to M.O.31. On the side of the accused, no oral, documentary evidence and material objects were marked. By considering the evidence, the trial Court found guilty of the accused persons and in respect of the appellant(A7), the trial Court convicted for the offence under Section 3(1) r/w Section 14(c) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. The period already undergone by him for the period from 10.10.2018 to 27.12.2018 was ordered to be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by this judgment, this appellant (A7) filed this criminal appeal. 5. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant (A7) submitted that the appellant is not challenging the conviction by the trial Court but only seeking to reduce the sentence on the ground that the appellant (A7) came to India as a migrant labour for his livelihood and he would fall under the category of victims of exploitation of human trafficking. The circular of the Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs Foreigners Division Official Memorandum, dated 2012, provides that victims and persons actually involved in human trafficking should be treated differently by the police authorities. 6. Further, the learned counsel for the appellant (A7) submitted that in view of the decision of the trial Court, no steps had been taken for deportation. Even if the appellant has completed the period of punishment, he cannot continue to be detained in Prison as an inmate. It is impermissible by law. He will be detained only in a particular place, which has been declared under Section 3(1)(e) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 respectively. Hence, the appellant prayed that this Hon''ble Court may be considered as leniency and thus render justice. 7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent submitted that the sentence imposed by the trial Court is proportionate to the offence committed by the appellant and thus, pleaded to dismiss the criminal appeal. 8. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the appellant (A7) came to India as a migrant labour for his livelihood and he fell under the category of victims of exploitation of human trafficking cannot be disputed. Further, it is also to be noticed that the Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs Foreigners Division Official Memorandum dated 2012, provides that victims and persons actually involved in human trafficking should be treated differently by the police authorities and not as criminals. In this case, the appellant is not a criminal and not involved in any criminal activities in India. 9. Considering the fact that this appellant and other accused A1 to A6 & A8 are Bangladesh Nationals and sentenced imposed on the other accused A1 to A6 & A8 by the trial Court to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months, this Court, to meet the ends of justice, is inclined to award the abovesaid same sentence to this appellant (A7) also. 10. In the result, the criminal appeal is partly allowed and sentence imposed by the trial Court on this appellant (A7) alone is hereby modified and directed the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for ten months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, instead of to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. Other directions issued by the trial Court in respect of the appellant (A7) are unaltered.