In a significant decision, the Supreme Court on May 8 declined to intervene in the alleged deportation of illegal Rohingya Muslim migrants from Delhi, saying that if Rohingya refugees in the country were found to be foreigners under Indian laws they will have to be deported. Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves and lawyer Prashant Bhushan had urgently approached the court with appeals, asserting that the Rohingyas are at risk of genocide in Myanmar and contending that as refugees, they possess the right to remain in India.
The bench, consisting of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and N Kotiswar Singh, ruled that the right to reside anywhere within India is limited to its citizens, indicating that non-citizens would be managed in accordance with the Foreigners Act. The court scheduled the hearing for the appeals on July 31.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and advocate Kanu Agrawal informed the bench that the Supreme Court had previously rejected requests to halt the deportation of Rohingya Muslims from Assam and Jammu & Kashmir. This decision followed the Central Government's expression of security concerns related to the Rohingyas' presence in India and the potential implications for national security.
In response to Gonsalves and Bhushan's claims that the Rohingyas fled their homeland as a result of genocide perpetrated by the Myanmar Army, and that they have been recognized as refugees by the United Nations Human Rights Commission with issued refugee cards, they argued for their right to live and reside in India.
However, the Solicitor General countered their arguments by asserting that the Rohingyas are classified as foreigners, and referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in the Assam case, which stated that it would refrain from commenting on the conditions in Myanmar. He further explained that the court also indicated that the right against deportation is linked to the right of residence, which is exclusively available to Indian citizens.
Despite these assertions, the Solicitor General assured the court that the deportation of illegal Rohingya migrants would adhere to due process under current laws and emphasized that India does not acknowledge them as refugees. He noted that India is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and questioned the legitimacy of the UNHCR's designation of them as refugees.
The bench acknowledged that while the right to life under Article 21 applies to the Rohingya migrants, they are nonetheless classified as foreigners, and their situation will be handled in line with the Foreigners Act.
The bench, consisting of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and N Kotiswar Singh, ruled that the right to reside anywhere within India is limited to its citizens, indicating that non-citizens would be managed in accordance with the Foreigners Act. The court scheduled the hearing for the appeals on July 31.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and advocate Kanu Agrawal informed the bench that the Supreme Court had previously rejected requests to halt the deportation of Rohingya Muslims from Assam and Jammu & Kashmir. This decision followed the Central Government's expression of security concerns related to the Rohingyas' presence in India and the potential implications for national security.
In response to Gonsalves and Bhushan's claims that the Rohingyas fled their homeland as a result of genocide perpetrated by the Myanmar Army, and that they have been recognized as refugees by the United Nations Human Rights Commission with issued refugee cards, they argued for their right to live and reside in India.
However, the Solicitor General countered their arguments by asserting that the Rohingyas are classified as foreigners, and referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in the Assam case, which stated that it would refrain from commenting on the conditions in Myanmar. He further explained that the court also indicated that the right against deportation is linked to the right of residence, which is exclusively available to Indian citizens.
Despite these assertions, the Solicitor General assured the court that the deportation of illegal Rohingya migrants would adhere to due process under current laws and emphasized that India does not acknowledge them as refugees. He noted that India is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and questioned the legitimacy of the UNHCR's designation of them as refugees.
The bench acknowledged that while the right to life under Article 21 applies to the Rohingya migrants, they are nonetheless classified as foreigners, and their situation will be handled in line with the Foreigners Act.
You may also like
Leo XIV's brother recalls feeling of 'disbelief' over his sibling becoming pope
Frustrated King Charles makes feelings clear to Queen Camilla at VE Day service
Himachal Pradesh fully prepared for internal security; no tension on China border: Jagat Singh Negi
India has sufficient food reserves: Shivraj Singh Chauhan amid escalation
Watch: BSF foils infiltration bid by terrorists in Samba district
