“India Is Not a Dharmshala”: Supreme Court Denies Relief to Sri Lankan National Facing Deportation

The Supreme Court of India on Monday made it clear that the country cannot serve as a shelter for refugees from across the world, as it rejected a plea seeking to prevent the deportation of a Sri Lankan Tamil national.

A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and K Vinod Chandran was hearing the case challenging a Madras High Court order that directed the Sri Lankan national to leave India immediately after serving a seven-year prison term under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967.

The Court remarked, “Is India to host refugees from all over the world? … This is not a Dharmshala that we can entertain foreign nationals from all over,” before dismissing the petition.

Background of the Case

The petitioner, Subaskaran, a Sri Lankan Tamil, was arrested in 2015 on charges of conspiring to revive the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a banned militant group that sought to establish an independent Tamil state in Sri Lanka.

He was convicted in 2018 by a trial court in Ramanathapuram under various laws including UAPA, the Passport Act, the Foreigners Act, the Poisons Act, and the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

In 2022, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court reduced his sentence to seven years and ordered him to leave India immediately after his release. The Court allowed him to remain temporarily in a refugee camp until his departure.

Family Pleas and Legal Journey

Subaskaran’s wife petitioned the Tamil Nadu government to allow him to stay with his family instead of deporting him, but received no response. She then sought relief from the Madras High Court to prevent deportation, but the plea was rejected.

This led to the Supreme Court petition where Subaskaran claimed he was falsely implicated and faced persecution if sent back to Sri Lanka.

Supreme Court’s Stance

Advocate R Sudhakaran, representing Subaskaran, argued that his client would face torture if deported, requesting the Court to allow him indefinite stay in a refugee camp in India.

The Supreme Court refused to intervene, stating that if Subaskaran’s life is at risk in Sri Lanka, he must seek refugee status in a third country. The Court emphasized that India cannot be a permanent refuge for all foreign nationals.