112 illegal Bangladeshis deported from Mumbai region; total this year jumps to 719
With the deportation of 92 immigrants from Mumbai on Thursday, the total number of deportations from the city alone has climbed to 719 this year, said a senior police officer. By comparison, a total of 152 Bangladeshi nationals were deported from Mumbai in the whole of 2024.
The documents show that the illegal immigrants were detained from across the city between June 12 and August 5. While 92 of them were from Mumbai — 40 women, 34 children and 18 men — the breakup of the 20 who were detained and deported from Mira Bhayander and Thane was not available.
'This time the government decided to drop the illegal immigrants at the Assam-Bangladesh border, which is highly secured and manned by the Indian Army and it is next to impossible to enter through the border there. They were handed over to the Bangladesh border security force,' a police officer said.
Another officer on condition of anonymity said, 'From January 1 till August 5 this year, the Mumbai police have deported 719 Bangladeshi nationals staying illegally in the city.'
The deported Bangladeshi nationals were detained by various police stations across the city and most of them were detained in the last week of July after they were ascertained to have violated visa norms and entered India illegally via the Indo-Bangladesh international border.
A senior IPS officer said, 'They were deported to Bangladesh under Section 3 (2) (c) of the Foreigners Act 1946 after completing the required legal process.'
The deportation started in February this year when the first lot of 12 people were sent back across the border. The crackdown on illegal Bangladeshi nationals gained momentum after the arrest of Shariful Islam, a Bangladeshi national who allegedly attacked Bollywood actor Saif Ali Khan inside his Bandra residence on January 16. Shariful was found to have a duplicate Aadhaar card with his photo and an Indian SIM card, which he allegedly procured illegally in India.
Describing the details of the operation, a senior police officer said once their informants tipped them off about suspicious people at building construction sites across the city, they were called to the police station. Following this, police collected evidence — call data records (to check if they had made international calls regularly to Bangladesh) or bank transactions — and then they were detained for legal procedure.
The documents show that out of the 92 deported from Mumbai, the highest number were from Andheri's Amboli area, from where a total of 11 were apprehended. The data further showed that in at least four cases only the mother was found to be staying with her minor kids illegally.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
First Post
8 minutes ago
- First Post
India Accuses Trump of Hypocrisy as Us Threatens More Tariffs Vantage with Palki Sharma
India Accuses Trump of Hypocrisy as Us Threatens More Tariffs | Vantage with Palki Sharma | N18G India has hit back at Donald Trump's criticism over New Delhi's oil purchases from Russia, calling it "unjustified and unreasonable". But the US president threatened more tariffs on India despite the Indian response. Will India stick to Russian oil? How is India standing up to Trump? Palki Sharma tells you. See More
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
Why India must reject US demands to cut Russian oil
Energy security is a core national interest. Surrendering it under coercion risks weakening not only India's negotiating position today but also its sovereignty in the policy choices of tomorrow read more India's position in the post-Ukraine war energy order has been pivotal. Since 2022, it has emerged as one of Russia's top two crude buyers, importing 1.7 to 1.9 million barrels per day at sustained discounts to Brent. These flows have been central to stabilising domestic energy costs, containing inflation, and protecting fiscal space. Yet this strategic advantage is now directly under attack from an explicitly political campaign by Washington. On August 7, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, citing that India 'directly or indirectly' imports Russian oil. The tariff, which will take effect 21 days later, is not a marginal measure. It targets a strategic partner in a manner no other major Russian oil buyer—notably China—has faced. Trump's framing is unambiguous: India's energy decisions are being weaponised in the broader US campaign against Moscow. This is the first time a U.S. president has linked trade penalties so explicitly to India's crude import mix, making the move as much a test of Indian sovereignty as of its economic resilience. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The irony is that this pressure comes amid fluid US–Russia negotiations. Trump has publicly claimed 'great progress' in talks between his special envoy and President Vladimir Putin, while simultaneously preparing secondary sanctions. Market reaction to this ambiguity has been sharp. Brent futures fell to $66.89 per barrel, their lowest since June 10, and U.S. WTI settled at $64.35, marking five consecutive days of losses. Traders are now caught between two signals—the threat of harsher sanctions on Moscow and the possibility of a sanctions rollback if a ceasefire deal materialises. In this environment, India's crude sourcing is being politicised at a time when the market itself is in flux. The selective nature of U.S. pressure is difficult to ignore. In 2024, the European Union's bilateral trade in goods with Russia reached €67.5 billion, with an additional €17.2 billion in services trade in 2023—figures far exceeding India's total trade with Russia. European imports of Russian liquefied natural gas reached a record 16.5 million tonnes in 2024, surpassing the previous record of 15.21 million tonnes in 2022. Yet these LNG flows, which are strategically significant and directly revenue-generating for Moscow, are not a sustained bone of contention for Washington. This disparity reinforces the perception that India is being singled out for political leverage while Western allies are afforded a wider berth in managing their own energy dependencies. If India were to sharply reduce its intake of Russian crude, the global oil market would tighten almost immediately. Brent prices could rise by three to seven dollars per barrel in the short term, with eight to twelve dollars possible if Russian redirection of cargoes falters and OPEC Plus delays the release of spare capacity. Domestically, India would face higher procurement costs for Middle Eastern grades, higher freight rates, and refinery yield penalties as plants shift away from Urals and ESPO blends. This would increase retail fuel prices or require fiscal subsidies—either of which would place upward pressure on inflation and reduce budgetary space for development spending. If China were to make a similar move, the market impact would be more severe. Chinese imports of Russian crude are in the range of 1.8 to 2.0 million barrels per day and are critical to Moscow's export revenues. A cut of this magnitude would strand more barrels for longer, as rerouting flows from China is more complex and costly than from India. Brent could rise by eight to fifteen dollars per barrel under typical market conditions and by as much as fifteen to twenty dollars if sanctions enforcement, insurance restrictions, or maritime bottlenecks reduce the flexibility of the shadow fleet. The impact would also be felt in refined product markets. China's large-scale refineries supply diesel, gasoline, and jet fuel to the region, so even modest run cuts would tighten global product balances and lift refining margins across Asia and Europe. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A simultaneous reduction by both India and China would constitute the largest disruption to Russian oil flows since the imposition of Western sanctions in 2022. In this combined scenario, the market could face an effective supply outage of three million barrels per day or more. Brent prices could spike well beyond twenty dollars per barrel in the short term, with sustained double-digit increases for months if OPEC Plus maintained production restraint. Freight rates would surge, the Dubai–Brent spread would narrow sharply, and refined product cracks would remain elevated. The shock would also spill into LNG markets if China sought to replace crude with higher gas imports, potentially tightening European gas supply and driving up benchmark prices in both Asia and Europe. The geopolitical asymmetry in Washington's approach remains striking. China faces no comparable public censure or tariff penalties, despite its imports being of equal or greater significance to Russia's revenue stream. The United States has limited leverage over Beijing and therefore concentrates its pressure on New Delhi, assuming greater compliance. Accepting such treatment would set a precedent that could extend beyond energy policy, inviting similar interventions in other areas of strategic importance. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's capacity to purchase discounted Russian oil is not merely a tactical advantage—it is a structural pillar of its macroeconomic stability. In 2024 alone, the discount on Russian grades saved India billions in procurement costs and helped keep consumer inflation within manageable bounds. Abandoning this under external pressure, particularly when major Western economies continue substantial trade with Russia, would be strategically counterproductive. The choice before New Delhi is about whether India will allow its energy policy to be dictated by another country's geopolitical agenda, even when that agenda is applied inconsistently across partners. A policy anchored in strategic autonomy means engaging with all partners, including the United States, from a position of equal respect, not asymmetric compliance. At a time when the global energy order is fragile, OPEC Plus is signalling potential supply increases, and markets are reacting sharply to diplomatic uncertainty, India should resist moves that compromise its economic and strategic flexibility. Energy security is a core national interest. Surrendering it under coercion risks weakening not only India's negotiating position today but also its sovereignty in the policy choices of tomorrow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Aditya (X: @adityasinha004) writes on macroeconomic and geopolitical issues. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's tech hiring ban: India's chance to redefine global innovation
By doubling down on its strengths—its people, its problems, its potential—India can turn exclusion into empowerment read more US President Donald Trump has urged American tech giants like Google, Microsoft, and Apple to stop hiring foreign workers, including those from India, and focus instead on creating jobs in the United States. His words sent ripples across the global tech landscape. At an AI Summit held in Washington on Wednesday, Trump said that American companies should now put national interests first in the fast-growing field of artificial intelligence. Although there has been no official policy announcement, this adds to the growing uncertainty for Indian professionals, as India plays a key role in the global operations of U.S. tech firms. Recent reports indicate that major U.S. tech firms are lobbying against strict hiring bans. For many, it felt like a betrayal—a nation that has long powered global innovation now faces exclusion. But what if this moment is India's chance to rewrite its story? Rather than a setback, Trump's directive could ignite India's ascent as a self-reliant tech superpower, proving it can innovate not just for the West but for the world. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump's remarks tap into a broader narrative of economic nationalism, one that paints foreign talent—particularly India's vast pool of engineers—as a drain on American jobs. This is no small matter. U.S. tech companies have been establishing engineering hubs in cities like Bengaluru and Hyderabad for decades, and India is a vital part of their global operations. Yet Trump's statement, aimed at boosting U.S. AI dominance, signals a pivot toward insularity. One of the directives outlines a nationwide strategy to accelerate the development of AI by relaxing regulations and enticing businesses to construct data centres and other essential infrastructure within the United States. Companies that receive federal funding to develop AI tools are subject to new regulations under the second order. Helping U.S.-made AI products compete internationally is the main goal of the third executive order. Together, they underscore a vision where global talent takes a back seat. India's tech sector risks disruption. American firms have leaned on Indian engineers for cost-efficient, high-skill labour, building software and cloud systems that power the world. A hiring freeze could shrink opportunities for Indian professionals, particularly those eyeing U.S. careers via H-1B visas. It might also chill investments in India's tech hubs, where companies like Google and Microsoft have sprawling campuses. The Brookings Institution notes that over half of top U.S. AI researchers are foreign-born, many from India. Curtailing this pipeline could slow innovation in the U.S., but it also threatens India's role as a global tech engine. The fear is real: a brain drain reversed, with talent staying home but lacking the platforms to thrive. Yet this challenge masks a profound opportunity. India can seize this moment to pivot from being the world's back office to its innovation hub. India should harness its engineers graduating annually—a massive talent pool. Instead of coding for Western giants, these minds can build indigenous platforms tailored to India's needs. Take agriculture, where AI could optimise crop yields for small farmers battling climate shifts. (Update: The Indian government recently announced a new AI mission focusing on agriculture, healthcare, and language models.) In healthcare, homegrown AI tools could diagnose diseases in rural clinics, bridging gaps where doctors are scarce. By focusing inward, India can solve local problems while creating globally competitive tech. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's digital infrastructure—think Aadhaar and UPI—already sets a global standard for scale and efficiency. Government backing could fuel AI hardware innovation. By investing in research hubs and easing startup regulations, India can nurture ecosystems where talent stays and thrives. Imagine an AI model trained on India's diverse languages, powering education or governance solutions exportable to Africa or Southeast Asia. Trump's push could catalyse this shift, forcing India to prioritise self-reliance over outsourcing. The other side has weight: global collaboration has driven tech's golden age. U.S. firms warn that restricting foreign talent could hamstring innovation, given America's own tech talent shortage. Indian professionals in the U.S. fear uncertainty, and companies reliant on government contracts may hesitate to defy Trump's rhetoric. But India's talent doesn't need Western validation to shine—it can build its own Silicon Valleys. Trump's call is a wake-up call for India. The country stands at a crossroads, with a chance to redefine global innovation. By doubling down on its strengths—its people, its problems, its potential—India can turn exclusion into empowerment. The world is watching. It's time for India to code its own future. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The writer is a columnist. His articles have appeared in various publications like The Independent, The Globe and Mail, South China Morning Post, The Straits Times, etc. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
