chief
Prime VIP
Guwahati, August 13
Dealing with a writ petition filed by a ‘deported’ Bangladeshi migrant, Mohd Ataur Rahman, the Gauhati High Court has termed the entire machinery and process of deportation of illegal Bangladeshi migrants farcical.
Taking serious note of the manner and method in which Bangladeshis are deported from India and could come back to India to invoke writ jurisdiction, Justice BK Sharma of the High Court in an order dated August 5, 2010, observed, “The entire machinery, including Foreigners’ Tribunals, are mere mockery and no useful purpose has been served in establishing Foreigners’ Tribunals and spending crores in the name of detection and deportation of the foreign nationals.”
The court directed both the Centre and state government of Assam to file their counter affidavit explaining their stand and position regarding the content of the writ petition filed by the deported Bangladeshi national by August 26 next.
The court also expressed its displeasure with both the governments for their failure to deal with the queries raised by the court in its earlier order dated May 19, 2010, in connection with the same case. The petitioner in his writ petition stated that he was left by the police deep inside a jungle along India-Bangladesh border near Karimganj on the night of November 20, 2008, after his arrest on November 14 that year.
In pursuant of an earlier court order the government of Assam through an affidavit on July 20, 2010, stated that the petitioner was pushed back to Bangladesh on November 17, 2008, and that the petitioner re-entered India and filed the instant writ petition. Regarding the petitioner’s stand that he was released deep inside a jungle along the Border, the Assam government stated that the Border Security Force (BSF), which is in charge of guarding the Indo-Bangladesh border, would have to furnish explanation and not the state government.
Peeved at the way the state government of Assam and Centre have responded to queries raised by the court so far in respect of the case, Justice Sharma observed, “If the Union and the state government are unperturbed in respect of magnitude of problem being faced by the state of Assam from unabated illegal influx of foreign nationals (Bangladeshi nationals), they should say so by filing an affidavit.”
Dealing with a writ petition filed by a ‘deported’ Bangladeshi migrant, Mohd Ataur Rahman, the Gauhati High Court has termed the entire machinery and process of deportation of illegal Bangladeshi migrants farcical.
Taking serious note of the manner and method in which Bangladeshis are deported from India and could come back to India to invoke writ jurisdiction, Justice BK Sharma of the High Court in an order dated August 5, 2010, observed, “The entire machinery, including Foreigners’ Tribunals, are mere mockery and no useful purpose has been served in establishing Foreigners’ Tribunals and spending crores in the name of detection and deportation of the foreign nationals.”
The court directed both the Centre and state government of Assam to file their counter affidavit explaining their stand and position regarding the content of the writ petition filed by the deported Bangladeshi national by August 26 next.
The court also expressed its displeasure with both the governments for their failure to deal with the queries raised by the court in its earlier order dated May 19, 2010, in connection with the same case. The petitioner in his writ petition stated that he was left by the police deep inside a jungle along India-Bangladesh border near Karimganj on the night of November 20, 2008, after his arrest on November 14 that year.
In pursuant of an earlier court order the government of Assam through an affidavit on July 20, 2010, stated that the petitioner was pushed back to Bangladesh on November 17, 2008, and that the petitioner re-entered India and filed the instant writ petition. Regarding the petitioner’s stand that he was released deep inside a jungle along the Border, the Assam government stated that the Border Security Force (BSF), which is in charge of guarding the Indo-Bangladesh border, would have to furnish explanation and not the state government.
Peeved at the way the state government of Assam and Centre have responded to queries raised by the court so far in respect of the case, Justice Sharma observed, “If the Union and the state government are unperturbed in respect of magnitude of problem being faced by the state of Assam from unabated illegal influx of foreign nationals (Bangladeshi nationals), they should say so by filing an affidavit.”
