Supreme Court To Decide Fate Of Rohingya Refugees: Deportation Or Protection?

During the hearing, the Bench of Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice N.K. Singh, was informed by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves that “some individuals were picked up by the police and deported just last night. This is deeply alarming, an outright shock. It amounts to a complete overreach of the Court’s directions.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union of India, responded that such claims must be placed on record through proper affidavits. “Someone needs to place this on record through an affidavit,” he said.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan submitted that he had already filed such an affidavit on May 5, stating, “Women, children, even lactating mothers have been detained from these camps.”

Gonsalves added that the authorities themselves had acknowledged the individuals as refugees and that he too had filed an affidavit.

The hearing took a serious turn when Gonsalves submitted that the Supreme Court has been “protecting these individuals for the last 10 years”. He read from the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, emphasizing the international recognition of refugee rights, including food, shelter, and the prohibition of arbitrary detention.

Justice Dipankar Datta, while engaging with the arguments, pointed out that “Some UNHCR cards have been issued as recently as April 2025,” indicating the ongoing nature of refugee status recognition. He, however, also observed that “in the context of Assam, a similar plea was dismissed,” to which Gonsalves quickly responded, “Those were migrants. This case concerns refugees.”

SG Mehta reiterated the government's consistent position: “Kindly refer to this Court’s 2021 order. India is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention.”

Justice Datta clarified that “there is no dispute regarding the UNHCR, but one cannot automatically claim benefits on that basis.”

Bhushan responded that India is, however, a ratifying member of the Geneva Convention and must honour its international obligations.

Justice Surya Kant, aiming to bring finality, remarked, “We will hear the matter finally and deliver a clear decision. If they have a right to remain here, it will be recognized. If not, they will be deported.”

In the midst of arguments, concerns were also raised about deaths inside detention centres. The petitioners urged the Court to stay further deportations until the matter was heard in full.

Gonsalves urged, “Please, no further deportations until this matter is heard.”

However, SG Mehta responded pointedly, “We’ve been hearing such claims for some time now.”

Justice Datta noted, “They are all foreigners. If they fall within the scope of the Foreigners Act, they will have to be dealt with under that law.”

In light of the gravity and urgency, the Counsels for the petitioners—Bhushan and Gonsalves, requested two hours to complete their arguments.

On the issue of ongoing deportations, Gonsalves pressed, “The deportation is a cause of great concern for us.”

To this, Justice Kant remarked that the SG has already assured that deportation, if any, would be in accordance with law.

SG Mehta added, “That statement was for the media. We are fully bound by your Lordships' order!”

In its brief order, the Court noted that “In light of the self-speaking order of 2021 passed by the coordinate bench, the learned Solicitor General states that no further directions are necessary at this stage.”

The matter is now listed for final hearing on July 31 at 11 AM.