|
The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed the habeas corpus plea seeking production of a detained Bangladeshi national before the court. The foreign national was stopped and detained at IGI Airport in October 2022.
The high court said that foreigners' rights are limited to life and liberty. They can not claim the right to reside or settle in India under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. The division bench, comprising justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Manoj Jain, held that the rights of such foreigners are limited to the right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. "We may also note that a foreign national cannot claim that he has the right to reside and settle in India under Article 19 (1) (e) of the Constitution of India," the bench said. The high court also referred to Supreme Court judgement in Hans Muller of Nurenburg Vs. Superintendent, Presidency Jail, Calcutta, wherein it was observed that power of the Government of India to expel foreigners is absolute and unlimited and there is no provision in the Constitution fettering such discretion. The bench added that the fundamental right of any such foreigner or suspected foreigner is limited to the one declared under Article 21 of Constitution of India, i.e. the fundamental right for life and liberty and there is nothing which may suggest that his liberty has been curtailed in an illegal or unlawful manner. "He himself is to be blamed for his miseries, as he has failed to explain how he came back to India when he had left India on a Bangladeshi passport," the bench remarked The High Court dismissed the plea moved by Kinadhan Chakma for production of Azal Chakma, who was detained at IGI airport in 2022. It was alleged that he is a Bangladeshi national who came to India on a Bangladeshi passport. Later on, he obtained an Indian passport fraudulently. The high court said in the oral judgement that Azal Chakma has been detained as he was allegedly found travelling on the basis of an Indian passport, which he had, as alleged, fraudulently procured. As noted, such a passport has already been revoked. The bench also noted that the documents collected by the authorities clearly indicate that he was holding Bangladeshi Passport and had come to India multiple times on the basis ofsuch passport. "When he had applied for visa, he claimed himself to be a Bangladeshi national by birth and also claimed that his parents were also Bangladeshi citizens," the bench observed. The high court also rejected the contention that Azal Chakma cannot be deported unless his Indian citizenship is terminated and held that even such contention is without any substance. "As per his own admission made before the Bangladeshi authorities when he had applied for visa for India way back in the years 2010 and 2011, he claimed himself to be a Bangladeshi national by birth and in such a situation, there is no question of termination of his alleged Indian citizenship, which he never seemed to have acquired," the bench held. (ANI)
|
