Illegal Migration from Bangladesh: ‘Systematic Infiltration a National Security Threat’: SG Tushar Mehta Tells SC

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi took up the matter but underscored that multiple factual and legal complexities were involved.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, opposing the plea, said the issue was not about individual hardship but about a much larger threat. “This is systematic infiltration. Agents are facilitating illegal entry. Several terrorist organisations have infiltrated,” he submitted, adding that illegal immigrants were consuming resources meant for Indian citizens.

The SG questioned why associations were approaching the Court instead of individuals. “Let an individual come saying I am being pushed out. The moment they come, they will have to justify their presence legally,” he said.

Justice Surya Kant observed that “there is a lot of illegal immigration also” and noted that if people were trying to enter and were pushed back, there should be no difficulty. But those presumed to have entered would first need to show proof of citizenship.

Justice Bagchi added that while security and integrity concerns must be safeguarded, issues of heritage and language could not be ignored. He noted, “Once a person is within Indian territory, there must be a proper procedure. In Bengal and Punjab, language is the same but borders divide us. We want the Union to clarify.”

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, argued that a woman had been forcibly pushed into Bangladesh merely because she spoke Bengali, without any determination of her citizenship. He said deportation without agreement with Bangladesh violated international law and alleged that the Border Security Force often acted arbitrarily.

Mehta, however, stressed that India was not alone in facing this “serious international challenge,” pointing out that several European nations too were struggling to handle infiltration. “Some countries are suffering; some are trying to accommodate. This is a very complicated issue,” Justice Kant agreed.

The Court clarified that the pending habeas corpus petition before the High Court would be decided independently and urged the High Court to take it up urgently. It granted liberty to the petitioner to raise citizenship issues there.

The Bench issued notice on the petitioner’s application, while directing the Solicitor General to file a reply in both this matter and the pending Rohingya case, noting that the issues were interlinked.

The matter will be heard next on September 11.

The petition, filed under Article 32 through AoR Kunal Chatterji, challenges what it calls the “systemic and arbitrary” detention and deportation of West Bengal migrant workers under a Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) letter dated May 2, 2025. The letter authorises inter-state verification and detention of “suspected illegal immigrants.”

According to the petition, despite possessing valid citizenship documents such as Aadhaar cards, voter IDs and ration cards, many migrant workers have been detained for extended periods without charge. It alleges that police officials in several states have mischaracterised the Bengali language as “Bangladeshi” and have classified Indian citizens as foreigners solely based on their speech or place of origin, amounting to discrimination and violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 22 of the Constitution.

The petition alleges that between February and July 2025, hundreds of workers, mostly engaged in low-income informal jobs, were detained across Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Haryana, Jharkhand, Delhi, and Chhattisgarh, despite holding valid proof of Indian citizenship. It claims some were wrongfully deported to Bangladesh and later brought back after verification.

According to the plea, the MHA letter is “vague, arbitrary, and unconstitutional” as it lacks objective criteria and safeguards, enabling misuse and discrimination based on language, region, or socio-economic status. It also argues that West Bengal was not consulted before issuing the letter, violating principles of cooperative federalism.

While issuing notice to the Union of India and the states concerned, the Bench refused to grant any interim relief against detention, warning that ex parte orders could have unintended consequences for border security.

Case Title: West Bengal Migrant Workers Welfare Board v. Union of India

Hearing Date: August 29, 2025

Bench: Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi