The Supreme Court of India recently declined to intervene in the case of a Sri Lankan Tamil national who is currently detained, stating that India cannot act as a shelter for refugees from across the globe.
During the hearing, Justice Dipankar Datta, who led the bench alongside Justice K Vinod Chandran, remarked that with a population of 140 crore, India cannot accommodate people from every country seeking refuge. “Is India to host refugees from all over the world? We are struggling with 140 crore. This is not a Dharmshala that we can entertain foreign nationals from all over,” he said, questioning whether the country should bear the responsibility of hosting global refugees.
The court was reviewing an appeal challenging a Madras High Court order that directed the petitioner—a Sri Lankan Tamil—to leave India immediately after serving a seven-year sentence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The petitioner’s lawyer argued that the man, who had entered India on a visa, feared for his life if returned to Sri Lanka. He further stated that the petitioner had been in detention for nearly three years with no steps taken toward deportation, and that his wife and children reside in India.
In response, Justice Datta asked what legal grounds the petitioner had to seek permanent residence in India, pointing out that the right to settle in India under Article 19 of the Constitution is reserved for citizens. He also clarified that there was no breach of Article 21 since the man’s liberty was curtailed in accordance with due legal procedure.
When the counsel emphasized that returning to Sri Lanka posed a serious threat to the petitioner’s safety, the judge remarked, “He can seek refuge in another country.”
This stance aligns with the Court’s earlier decision where it refused to halt the deportation of Rohingya refugees.
The petitioner had been arrested in 2015 by the Q Branch along with two others on suspicion of being members of the LTTE. In 2018, a trial court convicted him under Section 10 of the UAPA and sentenced him to 10 years in prison. The Madras High Court later reduced the sentence to 7 years in 2022 but ordered that he be deported after completing his term, and held in a refugee camp in the interim.
The petitioner contended that his past as an LTTE fighter had led to his name being blacklisted in Sri Lanka, making him vulnerable to arrest and torture if returned. He also cited his wife’s poor health and his son’s congenital heart condition as reasons to remain in India.
(With Inputs From Live Law)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.