"SC reserved judgment on the necessity of Bangladesh’s verification for deporting illegal migrants who have served their sentences"

The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment on a case about the indefinite detention of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India. The Court expressed disappointment that these immigrants are kept in prison even after completing their sentences. It also questioned the government on why it needs to verify their nationality from Bangladesh when the very reason for their conviction is that they entered India illegally as Bangladeshi nationals. "[when an immigrant is] apprehended, put to trial, and is convicted, what is the charge against him? That you are an illegal immigrant. You are not entitled to stay in this country without any valid passport or any other document. And we hold you guilty under the Foreigners' Act. Once this comes, not challenged, not stayed by any superior court, then what is the idea in asking the neighboring country to tell this country about his nationality and verification?", remarked Justice JB Pardiwala. At the same time, the Court pulled up State of West Bengal for not having correctional homes/detention centres, which has statedly resulted in illegal immigrants languishing in jails. "Why you don't have a correctional home or detention centre? Even after a person is convicted, he undergoes the entire sentence, you keep him in jail!? How can you do that? Is the state so poor that it does not have a correctional home or a detention centre? It's very easy for you to put a board outside the jail premises 'correctional home' but still it remains a jail...and jail means you don't allow him to walk out, have a stroll in the bazar, ask him to come back by sunset, and then you put him again. Correctional homes probably may have some liberty, they move around in a restricted area which is earmarked...", exclaimed Justice Pardiwala. The Supreme Court is hearing a case about illegal Bangladeshi immigrants who are kept in jail even after completing their sentences. This case started in 2011 when a petitioner wrote to the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice about the issue. The High Court took action, and in 2013, the case was transferred to the Supreme Court. During the hearing, Advocate Vrinda Grover argued that in West Bengal, these immigrants are being held in jails, which are being used as detention centers, even after serving their sentences. She said this violates their rights under Article 21 and pointed out that 70 out of 150 detained immigrants are women. Grover explained that there are different ways to deport Bangladeshis. If they are caught at the border, they are sent back immediately. If they enter by mistake, the Border Security Force conducts an inquiry before sending them back. According to a 2009 government rule, if verification is unclear, they should still be deported after 30 days. Since West Bengal does not have official detention centers, Grover suggested that released immigrants could be sent elsewhere. She referred to a 2019 Supreme Court ruling in Assam, where foreigners who had spent more than three years in detention were ordered to be released. Later, in 2020, this was changed to two years with fewer conditions for release. West Bengal’s lawyer argued that Bangladesh must confirm a person’s nationality before they can be deported. However, Justice Pardiwala questioned why this verification is needed when the government has already charged them as Bangladeshi nationals for illegal entry. When the lawyer said Bangladesh’s confirmation is required to issue travel documents, the judge replied that this should not be India’s concern. Illegal Migrants Still in Prison After Serving Their Sentences: Petitioner During the hearing, Advocate Vrinda Grover argued that illegal immigrants are being kept in prison even after completing their sentences under the Foreigners' Act. She questioned how this could happen, saying it violates their rights under Article 21. "If I have already served my punishment, why should my situation be worse than those who were never caught?" she asked. Justice Pardiwala agreed that the situation was "very pathetic." When Grover insisted that the issue needed urgent attention, the judge assured, "We will take care." How Long Can You Keep an Immigrant If Their Country Won’t Take Them Back? The government’s lawyer, ASG Bhati, argued that illegal migrants could not be sent back without verifying their nationality. Justice Pardiwala questioned this, pointing out that these people were convicted because they entered India illegally—so why wait for confirmation from their home country? The judge emphasized that action must be taken immediately. "Imagine—over 1,000 people are stuck as undertrials," he said. When the government admitted that India’s open borders were a challenge, Justice Pardiwala responded that this issue was leading to bigger security concerns. He asked, "How many more correctional homes can India set up? How long will we keep these people in detention?" He also pointed out that India treats detained immigrants with care, providing shelter and medical aid. In other countries, he suggested, such migrants might not survive. Meanwhile, another Supreme Court bench led by Justice Abhay Oka also criticized the government for keeping illegal immigrants in detention indefinitely. Justice Oka’s bench ruled that deportation should not be delayed just because a migrant’s foreign address hasn’t been verified and ordered the deportation process for 63 people to begin. Case Title: Maja Daruwala v. Union of India | Transfer Case (Criminal) No. 1/2013 www.legalmeet.in