The Supreme Court of India on Monday asserted that India is not a “dharamshala” (public shelter) to accommodate foreign nationals from across the globe, while hearing a plea from a Sri Lankan national and former LTTE member seeking to remain in the country after completing a seven-year sentence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and K. Vinod Chandran made the observation while considering a challenge to a Madras High Court order directing the petitioner to leave India immediately upon completion of his sentence.
“Is India to host refugees from all over the world? We are struggling with 140 crore people… This is not a dharamshala that we can entertain foreign nationals from all over the world,” the court remarked sharply.
Bench Dismisses Plea on Grounds of Citizenship
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the individual faced possible torture and arrest if he returned to Sri Lanka due to his past affiliation with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The lawyer also noted that the petitioner’s wife and children had already settled in India.
However, the court was firm in its stance that the right to reside in India is reserved for Indian citizens under the Constitution.
“What is your right to settle here?” the bench asked pointedly. “Go to some other country.”
The petitioner had been convicted under Section 10 of the UAPA, which penalizes membership in unlawful associations. While the Madras High Court had reduced his sentence from 10 years to seven, it had also mandated immediate deportation following completion of his term.
Supreme Court on Rohingya Deportations: Uphold Indian Law
The court also referred to recent concerns raised in another case involving Rohingya refugees, in which petitioners alleged that 43 refugees, including women and children, were being deported after being abandoned in the Andaman Sea.
In that matter, the apex court expressed frustration, stating,
“When the country is passing through a difficult time, you come out with fanciful ideas.”
The court reaffirmed that any foreign national, including those holding UNHCR identity cards, must be processed under the Foreigners Act, and that such UN-issued documents do not hold legal standing under Indian law.
“If they are foreigners and covered under the Foreigners Act, then they must be dealt with accordingly,” the bench noted.
India’s Legal Position on Refugees
India is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, and hence does not have a national asylum framework. The treatment of foreign nationals, including refugees, is governed strictly under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Legal experts note that while humanitarian concerns are valid, national security and demographic considerations play a central role in court decisions regarding deportation and settlement of foreign nationals.
