PIL In Gauhati High Court Challenges Assam Govt’s ‘Push-Back Policy’ For Allegedly Deporting Suspected Illegal Immigrants
A Public Curiosity Litigation has been filed by a scholar’s affiliation within the Gauhati Excessive Court docket looking for that the “push-back” coverage adopted by Assam Authorities with respect to alleged unlawful immigrants, be declared as unconstitutional, being violative of Article(s) 14, 21 and 22 of the Structure.
When the matter was taken up on June 27, a division bench of Justice Manish Choudhury and Justice Mitali Thakuria was knowledgeable by the counsel showing for the petitioner–ALL BTC Minority College students Affiliation, that he had obtained the detailed particulars of individuals who have been picked up and subjected to the push-back coverage adopted by the State.
It was additional submitted that these individuals have been earlier on Indian soil, however, after being picked up, their whereabouts weren’t recognized. The counsel submitted that he shall file an extra affidavit furnishing the small print of these individuals. Alternatively, the respondent State questioned the maintainability of the PIL.
“As hunted for and agreed to by the realized counsel for the events, listing the case on 22.07.2025,” the court docket mentioned in its order.
Notably, the petitioner affiliation had moved the Supreme Court docket as nicely, however had withdrawn its plea after the Supreme Court expressed its inclination to dismiss the case.
Background
The plea challenges the introduction of the “push-back” coverage in Assam by the State whereby people are allegedly picked up on the idea of suspicion and are claimed to be pushed again throughout the border with out “following the due means of regulation”. The plea claims that the coverage has been adopted by the State of Assam in an arbitrary method, flouting the due means of regulation violates Article 14, 21 of the Structure of India in addition to different home and Worldwide legal guidelines.
The petition claims that the coverage deprives people from contesting their deportation and taking authorized recourse by approaching the Foreigners Tribunal. This was alleged to be violative of Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Structure. The PIL acknowledged,
“Deportation with out discover, adjudication or alternative to attraction constitutes a grave violation of constitutional due course of. It’s unlucky that regardless of having quite a few legislations relating to deportation, the State of Assam has undertaken an arbitrary coverage of ‘push again’, which is bereft of the rules of pure justice.”
The PIL additionally acknowledged that there was an absence of judicial oversight over the push-back coverage because the operations have been being undertaken with out adjudication of the Foreigners Tribunal, thereby, violating the mandate of the Foreigners Act, 1946—which prescribes that no individual will be deemed a foreigner besides by a reasoned declaration by the Foreigners Tribunal.
Moreover, the PIL refers to Supreme Court docket’s determination in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005), the place the apex court docket emphasised on the necessity to adhere to due means of regulation in figuring out and deporting international nationals, underscoring that any departure from due course of would threat wrongful deprivation of citizenship, significantly for weak teams.
The plea claims that the coverage was alleged to haven’t any authorized backing and aligned neither with home regulation nor worldwide regulation. It was highlighted that the State had intensified the push-back drive pursuant to the Supreme Court docket’s order in Rajubala Das v. Union of India dated 04.02.2025, the place it had directed the State to deport solely 63 people who have been declared foreigners with recognized nationalities.
It claims that the State, had misinterpreted the Supreme Court docket’s order, and was allegedly utilizing this as a “blanket authorisation” to provoke push again in opposition to suspected people past the listing of the 63 deportees whose citizenship/nationalities have been sub-judice.
The petition claims that the Assam Border Police had arrested over 50 people from numerous districts and transported them to the Matia detention camp in Goalpara. The plea claims that these individuals have been handed over to the Border Safety Pressure, which allegedly forcibly pushed them into no-man’s land alongside the Mankachar border with Bangladesh, usually in the course of the night time hours.
In opposition to this backdrop, the plea claims that when an individual has already entered into India, BSF can not push them again with out an order of deportation by a reliable civil authority or court docket.
The plea refers to a number of information stories to state that numerous people together with a authorities faculty instructor have been deported, which suggests a “sample of unlawful detention and cross border expulsion with out authorized course of”.
Case Title: ALL BTC Minority College students Affiliation v The Union of India
