Missing Rohingyas’ Case: SC Questions Whether Illegal Migrants Deserve Red-Carpet Treatment?
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Delhi,02, December,2025-The Supreme Court on Monday posed searching questions on the limits of judicial intervention in matters concerning illegal immigration, asking how far the law could be stretched to accommodate individuals who have entered India without authorisation.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, sitting with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, observed that India remained a nation with “extremely sensitive borders, particularly along the northern frontier,” and said any judicial approach must remain mindful of the implications for national security and resource allocation.
During the hearing of a plea concerning a group of Rohingya immigrants, the CJI asked whether illegal entrants could claim access to the country’s finite resources at the cost of the rights and needs of Indian citizens. “Should illegal immigrants be given access to the resources of this country at the expense of the citizens?” the CJI pointedly queried, reflecting the Bench’s concern about balancing humanitarian considerations with statutory limits.
The petitioner before the Court clarified that the present challenge did not concern broader refugee policy but the alleged “disappearance” of several Rohingya detainees from police custody and the possibility that they had been deported without due process.
At this juncture, CJI Kant asked: “where is the order of the Government of India declaring them (Rohingyas) as refugees? Refugee is a well-defined legal term and there is a prescribed authority by the Government to declare them. If there is no legal status of a refugee, and somebody is an intruder, and he enters illegally, do we have an obligation to keep that fellow here?”
According to submissions, the Delhi Police allegedly picked up a group of Rohingyas in May, after which their whereabouts remain unknown.
“The case here is of Custodial disappearance “The Counsel Replied.
Counsel argued that any deportation must strictly comply with the Union Government’s own memorandum governing the removal of illegal immigrants, which prescribes an established, lawful procedure.
“What we cannot do is to traffic them out, which is harmful to national security”
At this point CJI said that “if they do not have legal status to Saty in India, and you are an intruder, we have a very sensitive border in the North India side. If an intruder comes, do we give thema red carpet welcome saying we would like to give you all facilities? What is the problem in sending them back? CJI Asked. The counsel said that they must be sent back, but as per the law.
CJI Kant said that “First you enter, you cross the border illegally. You dug a tunnel or cross the fence and enter India illegally. Then you say, now that I have entered, your laws must apply to me and say, I am entitled to food, I am entitled to shelter, my children are entitled to education. Do we want to stretch the law like this?
Counsel for the petitioner stated that she was not attempting to “stretch the law,” but only to seek enforcement of the current deportation procedure. The petitioner contended that if deportation has taken place, it must be shown to be in conformity with the existing legal framework and not through opaque or arbitrary processes.
The Bench indicated that while the rights of individuals in custody must be safeguarded, the Court cannot ignore the legal status of those who have entered the country unlawfully. It sought the Union Government’s response on whether the detainees had been deported and, if so, whether statutory procedure had been followed.
The matter will be taken up next after the Centre files its affidavit clarifying the status of the missing individuals and the protocol adopted in their case.
The petitioner was represented by Advocate Ms. J. Joe Anton Beno, Advocate-on-Record (AoR).
