Bangladeshi woman deported, sone moves Supreme Court
SC seeks Union's response; plea challenges 'push back'
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre's response to a petition by a man alleging that his mother, released after detention of three years following a Foreigner Tribunal identifying her as a Bangladeshi, may have been forcibly pushed into Bangladesh despite her plea against the tribunal's order pending in SC since 2017.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Appearing for Iunuch Ali, senior advocate
told a partial working day bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and A G Masih that she was picked up by Dhubri police and allegedly pushed back into Bangladesh.
'How can the Dhubri SP determine whether she is a Bangladeshi immigrant? Was she produced before a magistrate after being detained? The son does not know her whereabouts. The Centre must inform him about her whereabouts,' Sibal said.
SC issued notice to Centre on this plea.
Sibal also questioned the 'push back' of illegal Bangladeshi migrants and this is unknown to the process of law. He said the only legal process available is 'deportation'. The petitioner said, 'The law does not recognize push back, i.e arresting foreign nationals and taking them to the international border and either casting them away or pushing them across international borders without any verification and acceptance by the authorities of the other country.
This is illegal, not permitted by any law.'
Petitioner's mother Monowara Bewa was declared a foreigner by Dhubri Foreigners Tribunal on March 17, 2016. The Gauhati HC upheld the tribunal's order on Feb 28, 2017. Her appeal against the HC order is pending adjudication in the SC for the last eight years.
In the meantime, the SC in another case in 2019 ordered that foreigners cannot be kept in detention indefinitely and must be either deported to their native country or released on bail.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The Centre had said that deportation is dependent on the host country accepting their citizen. Based on this 2019 judgment, Bewa was released in Dec 2019.
She was detained again on May 24, as the drive against illegal Bangladeshi immigrants picked pace after the terror attack on tourists at Pahalgam and the 'Op Sindoor' by Indian armed forces against terrorist bases in Pakistan. The petitioner said her detention was in violation of her rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
US Congressmen support India's right to respond to terrorism
A group of US Congressmen on Wednesday expressed unequivocal and bipartisan condemnation for the Pahalgam terror attack and extended support for India's right to respond to terrorism in the spirit of zero tolerance against terrorism. The lawmakers also hailed the strong strategic partnership between India and the US during a meeting with an all-party delegation led by Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, who briefed them on the cross-border terrorism faced by India and the country's strong and resolute stance in the fight against terror. 'Bipartisan co-chairs @RoKhanna & @RepMcCormick and vice co-chairs @RepAndyBarr & @RepVeasey of India Caucus in the House of Representatives met with the visiting Parliamentary delegation led by @ShashiTharoor today,' the Indian Embassy said in a post on X. The parliamentary delegation briefed the Caucus members on the cross-border terrorism faced by India and New Delhi's strong and resolute stance in the fight against terror, it said. 'The Congressmen expressed unequivocal and bipartisan condemnation for the terror attack in Pahalgam. They expressed support for India's right to respond to terrorism in the spirit of zero tolerance against terrorism,' the Indian mission said. The all-party delegation also held candid and fruitful exchanges with House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) leadership. 'Chair @RepBrianMast, Ranking Member @RepGregoryMeeks, South and Central Asia Subcommittee Chair @RepHuizenga, Ranking Member @RepKamlagerDove, Ranking Member @RepBera and East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee @RepYoungKim greeted the delegation,' the Indian Embassy said in another post on X. The parliamentary delegation briefed the committee members on the success of Operation Sindoor in defining a new normal in India's fight against cross-border terrorism. The committee leadership condemned the Pahalgam attack unequivocally and said India and USA stand together in their unwavering resolve and fight against terrorism in all its forms. The delegation is one of the seven multi-party delegations India had tasked to visit 33 global capitals to reach out to the international community to emphasise Pakistan's links to terrorism. Other members of the delegation are Sarfaraz Ahmad (JMM), Ganti Harish Madhur Balayogi (TDP), Shashank Mani Tripathi (BJP), Bhubaneswar Kalita (BJP), Milind Deora (Shiv Sena), Tejasvi Surya (BJP) and India's former Ambassador to the US Taranjit Sandhu. The delegation has travelled to Guyana, Panama, Colombia and Brazil before arriving in Washington on the last leg of its tour. In its interactions in the US, the delegation will convey India's resolve against terrorism and emphasise Pakistan's links to terrorism. Speaking to PTI, delegation member Deora said that the group in the US, as well as those visiting other regions and countries, is telling the world that 'India has had enough.' He said that every country they visited so far 'issued very unequivocal, I would almost say, unconditional, statements in favour of India.' 'We want to live in peace. We would prefer it if we have a stable neighbour. Nobody wants an unstable lunatic living next to you,' he said. Another delegation member Surya told PTI that there is absolutely no sympathy towards Pakistani-originated terrorism. The countries the delegation visited have 'very clearly understood why India was constrained to respond militarily in the way it did, and have supported India's counterterrorism measure.' On a Pakistani delegation arriving in Washington the same day, Deora said, 'There is no doubt in anyone's mind in the United States that Pakistan is a banana republic, a failed state, a terror exporter, a country where the civilian government has no power, (it's) the army that controls the power. So I don't think that it matters to India that there's a Pakistani delegation trying to play copy and paste.' Surya also said that it was not the 'first time that the Pakistanis tried to copy India in what India tries to do, but they end up a cheap copy.' He said that the world has long observed what India stands for and what Pakistan stands for. Investing in India, he said, is seen as an investment in democracy, responsible civilian leadership and global progress. On the other hand, he noted that every terrorist attack in the last 20-30 years that has rocked the world has had investigations directly or indirectly leading to Pakistan. He added that over 50 UN-designated terrorists have formed a safe haven in Pakistan. 'So the narrative of a country like Pakistan cannot be salvaged by an accented English speaking suit-wearing ex-foreign minister. Pakistan's hands are too full in blood to be washed away by this overnight drama,' Surya said. Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, with India carrying out precision strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in the early hours of May 7. Pakistan attempted to attack Indian military bases on May 8, 9, and 10. The Indian side responded strongly to the Pakistani actions. The on-ground hostilities ended with an understanding of stopping the military actions following talks between the directors general of military operations of both sides on May 10.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Collegium system reforms can't be at cost of judicial independence: CJI
Amid a clamour for legislative revamp of the judges-selecting-judges system, fuelled by Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar's statements, CJI B R Gavai has said no reform in the collegium system could be at the "cost of judicial independence" and that judiciary should retain its primacy in appointments to Supreme Court and high courts. At a round-table in UK Supreme Court on Tuesday evening, CJI Gavai said, "There may be criticism of the collegium system, but... judges must be free from external control." CJI said SC had struck down National Judicial Appointments Commission Act in 2015 as the law attempted to dilute judiciary's independence by giving primacy to the executive in court appointments. Unwarranted interference led to collegium system, says CJI Tracing the evolution of the collegium system through two SC judgments in 1993 and 1998, the CJI said the executive had the final say in appointment of judges to Supreme Court and HCs till 1993 and that system saw two senior-most judges of SC getting superseded in the appointment of CJIs (both by the govt headed by Indira Gandhi) in breach of established traditions. He said the collegium system evolved as judiciary's response to the executive's excesses and unwarranted interference in appointments to constitutional courts. As per the two judgments concerned, the collegium was to act in unanimity and its decision was to be final, Justice Gavai said, adding that this "sought to ensure independence of judiciary, reduce executive interference and maintain judiciary's autonomy in its appointments". Quoting B R Ambedkar's words - "our judiciary must both be independent of the executive and must also be competent in itself" - the CJI said the fact that constitutional courts drew salaries from the Consolidated Fund of India made judges independent of the executive. Referring to Kesavananda Bharati judgment of 1973 that propounded the basic structure doctrine by a 13-judge bench through seven to six majority, CJI Gavai said, "This ruling established a significant judicial precedent, affirming that certain fundamental principles, such as democracy, rule of law, and the separation of powers, are inviolable and cannot be altered."
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Government confident of Parliament consensus on Yashwant Varma's removal
NEW DELHI: If Justice Yashwant Varma doesn't resign and holds on to his argument of being "innocent", he may earn the unenviable distinction of being the only judge to be removed through Parliament's removal motion, with most parties pledging "unity" on the issue of corruption, of which the three-member SC panel has found him guilty. Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju said most of opposition parties favoured bringing the motion of removal, which may be introduced in the monsoon session (July 21 to Aug 12). Can't approach graft in judiciary through political prism: Rijiju Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju said most of parties favoured bringing the motion of removal, which, by all accounts, may be introduced in the forthcoming monsoon session, scheduled from July 21 to Aug 12. Rijiju said Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs (CCPA) has sent the recommendation for the monsoon session to President Droupadi Murmu. The minister said although opposition parties would formally respond in a couple of days, he had been assured of their support and was confident of the same, as there was no scope for politicking as corruption in the judiciary could not be approached through a "political prism". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villa For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Villas in Dubai | Search ads Learn More Undo Rijiju said he would also reach out to smaller parties as govt wants all parties to "jointly" move the motion. "Govt feels the matter related to corruption is not one political party's agenda. It is a stand of all parties to fight against the menace of corruption, whether it is the judiciary or any other space," he said. He , however, said the decision on which House the motion would be brought in - LS or RS - would be taken based on the business of each House. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the Speaker or the Chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal has been sought. The committee will consist of the CJI or an SC judge, an HC chief justice and a "distinguished jurist". Meanwhile, Congress said govt had announced dates for the monsoon session 47 days in advance to run away from the opposition's demand for an immediate special session to discuss Pahalgam terror attack and Centre's "failure" to bring the terrorists to justice, the impact of Operation Sindoor and its "blatant politicisation".
