Case Title: Mohammad Salimullah v. Union Of India
The Supreme Court, while rejecting a petition to halt the deportation of Rohingya refugees detained in Jammu, stated that the right, not to be deported is ancillary to the fundamental right to reside or settle in any part of India granted by Article 19(1)(e) of the Constitution.
Only Indian citizens have access to the basic right under Article 19(1)(e).
"It is also true that the rights granted by Articles 14 and 21 are applicable to all people, citizens or not. However, the right not to be deported is an accessory or concurrent right to stay or settle in any part of India's territory protected by Article 19(1)(e)," the bench said.
The panel, which included then Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, AS Bopanna, and V. Ramasubramanian, stated that the Rohingyas in Jammu will not be deported unless the proper protocol is followed.
The court made this observation while dismissing an interlocutory plea seeking,
(i) the release of the detained Rohingya refugees; and
(ii) a direction to the Union of India not to deport the Rohingya refugees who have been detained in the sub jail in Jammu. The Centre had argued in opposition to this application that, while the rights granted under Articles 14 and 21 may be available to non-citizens, the basic right to reside and settle in this country protected under Article 19(1)(e) is only open to citizens.
The Centre also claimed that-
(i) there is a threat to the country's internal security; and
(ii) due to the porous nature of the national borders, agents and touts are giving a safe way for illegal immigrants in India.
During the hearing, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who represented the petitioner, referred to a ruling issued by the International Court of Justice last year to underline the genocidal threat posed to the Rohingyas in Myanmar. He further mentioned that Myanmar is currently governed by a military government that was forcibly installed. As a result, returning Rohingyas - who have endured atrocities from the army even during democratic administration - to Myanmar when it is ruled by a military junta will harm them, according to Bhushan. The Centre, on the other hand, stated that the International Court of Justice decision has no bearing on the current application and that the Union of India generally follows the procedure of notifying the Government of the native country of the foreigners and ordering their deportation only when the Government of the native country confirms that the persons concerned are citizens/nationals of that country and are entitled to return.
"There is no denial of the fact that India is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention. Therefore, serious objections are raised, whether Article 51(c) of the Constitution can be pressed into service unless India is a party to or ratified a convention. But there is no doubt that the National Courts can draw inspiration from International Conventions/Treaties, so long as they are not in conflict with the municipal law," the court noted.