Supreme Court: The Supreme Court rejected a Sri Lankan national’s asylum request today, stating that India is not a dharamshala (free shelter) for migrants from across the world. Justices Dipankar Datta and K Vinod Chandran heard the case, which involved a Sri Lankan national detained in 2015 on suspicion of having links to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a banned terrorist organization formerly active in Sri Lanka.

Case Registered on:

A trial court convicted him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in 2018 and sentenced him to 10 years in prison. In 2022, the Madras High Court reduced his sentence to seven years, but ordered him to leave the country immediately after completing his term. The court also directed him to stay in a refugee camp until his deportation.

Petitioner Statement:

The petitioner, a Tamil national from Sri Lanka, told the Supreme Court that he entered India on a valid visa and that his life faced serious threats back in Sri Lanka. He stated that authorities had detained him for nearly three years without initiating the deportation process. He also informed the court that his wife and children currently live in India.

In response, Justice Datta asked, “Is India supposed to host refugees from all over the world?” He further remarked, “We are already struggling with a population of 140 crore. We cannot turn this country into a dharamshala for foreigners.”

Also Read: Supreme Court Orders Equal Pension, Irrespective of Joining Date

The petitioner’s attorney invoked Article 19 of the Constitution, guaranteeing fundamental rights like freedom of speech and travel, and Article 21, which protects life and liberty, to defend the case. However, Justice Datta clarified that the petitioner’s arrest under the law did not violate Article 21. The court emphasized that only Indian citizens can claim rights under Article 19. Directly addressing the petitioner, the judge asked, “What is your right to settle here?” When the attorney stressed that the petitioner was a refugee and his life was at risk in Sri Lanka, the court instructed him to relocate.

Share

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•