Bail Refused/Court’s View:

A Division Bench of Justice Inderjeet Singh and Justice Bhuwan Goyal held that, considering the facts of the case, the statements of the protected witnesses, and the seriousness of the allegations, there was no reason to interfere with the trial court’s orders rejecting bail. The Court observed:

“Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, statement of protected witnesses and the seriousness of allegations levelled against the accused-appellants, we do not deem it just and proper to allow these appeals.”

Appeals Before High Court:

The Bench was hearing criminal appeals filed against three separate orders passed by the Special Judge (NIA Cases), Jaipur, which had rejected the bail applications of the accused in an FIR registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), Jaipur.

Counsel for the accused argued that they had been falsely implicated and had been in judicial custody for more than two years. It was also submitted that the statements of the protected witnesses had already been recorded before the trial court. Since the trial was likely to take considerable time to conclude, the accused sought to be released on bail.

The State opposed the bail pleas, arguing that the accused are residents of Myanmar and, if released, there was a strong possibility that they could threaten the victims or the complainant and flee from India.

Prosecution’s Allegation:

Opposing the bail applications, the Special Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations against the accused-appellants were:

“that they, without any valid passport, illegally imported Rohingya origin girls by deceiving them to solemnize their marriage and thereafter sold them.”

Witnesses Yet to Depose:

The prosecution also pointed out that the statements of the material witnesses and the victims/complainants had not yet been recorded before the trial court. Therefore, it argued that this was not a fit stage to grant bail.

Appeals Dismissed:

After considering the nature of the allegations, the evidence already available on record, and the fact that key witnesses are yet to be examined, the High Court held that no case for granting bail was made out. It accordingly dismissed all three criminal appeals and upheld the trial court’s orders refusing bail.

Case Details: Mohammad Usman Vs National Investigation Agency & Other Connected Petitions (Criminal Appeal No. 516/2025, Criminal Appeal No. 399/2024 and Criminal Appeal No. 440/2024).