New Delhi, India’s Supreme Court has raised sharp questions over whether individuals who enter the country illegally can demand procedural safeguards before deportation, in a hearing that underscored the tension between humanitarian concerns and national security imperatives.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, sitting with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by activist Rita Manchanda alleging that several Rohingya individuals detained by Delhi Police in May had “disappeared” from custody and may have been deported without due process.
“If you cross a fenced border illegally and enter India, can you then insist that Indian law must now protect you — that you are entitled to notice, food, shelter, education for children?” the Chief Justice asked rhetorically. “Do we stretch the law to this extent?”
He pointed to India’s “extremely sensitive” northern borders and asked whether illegal entrants should be accorded “red-carpet treatment”. The bench also noted that India has its own citizens living in poverty who remain the state’s primary responsibility.
The petitioner’s counsel, while not opposing deportation in principle, argued that any removal must follow established procedure and that the sudden disappearance of persons in acknowledged police custody amounted to an unlawful “custodial disappearance”. She stressed that the plea did not seek refugee status or repatriation, but merely adherence to existing government guidelines on deportation.
Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, opposed issuance of notice on the petition, calling certain prayers “worrying” and questioning the locus standi. He described the petitioner as a “stranger” to the issue and urged the court not to entertain the matter.
The bench expressed concern that granting relief in one case could trigger similar demands from other groups and adjourned the hearing to 16 December, when it will take up a larger batch of petitions concerning Rohingya detainees and those claiming refugee status.
The court’s observations align with its April 2021 ruling that, while Article 21 guarantees life and liberty to non-citizens, the right against deportation is linked to Article 19(1)(e) — the right to reside and settle in India — which is available only to citizens.
More than 700,000 Rohingya fled Myanmar in 2017 in what the United Nations has described as a campaign bearing the “hallmarks of genocide”. Most remain in camps in Bangladesh. India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and treats Rohingya as illegal immigrants liable to deportation, though it has in the past allowed the UNHCR to process some cases.
The matter will next be heard alongside other pending Rohingya-related petitions on 16 December.
