''Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India'' (Writ Petition (Civil) 793 of 2017), is a petition challenging the deportation of
Rohingya Muslims
The Rohingya people () are a stateless Indo-Aryan ethnic group who predominantly follow Islam and reside in Rakhine State, Myanmar (previously known as Burma). Before the Rohingya genocide in 2017, when over 740,000 fled to Bangladesh, an ...
who had taken refuge in India to escape
persecution in Myanmar. The court however, in an
interim order
The term interim order refers to an order issued by a court during the pendency of the litigation. It is generally issued by the Court to ensure Status quo. The rationale for such orders to be issued by the Courts is best explained by the Latin leg ...
rejected any relief and allowed their deportation subject to proper procedure being followed.
Background
In 2017, Indian government sources estimated that around 40,000 Rohingya Muslims were living in different parts of the country, having entered India illegally and around 10,000 were in
Jammu & Kashmir.
Petitioners Mohammad Salimullah and Mohammad Shaqir, sought interim relief against the deportation of these people and also sought the release of over 150 Rohingya refugees reportedly detained in a Jammu jail.
Significance
The petitioners argued that deportation by the Indian government would violate the rights guaranteed under
Articles 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Indian Constitution, which are available to all persons. The court however observed that, "''the right not to be deported, is ancillary or concomitant to the right to reside or settle in any part of the territory of India guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e)''", and that such a right is only available to its citizens. The court also argued that since India is not a signatory to
UN Convention on the Status of Refugees 1951 or its
1967 Protocol
The Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees is a key treaty in international refugee law. It entered into force on 4 October 1967, and 146 countries are parties.
The 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees restri ...
, the principle of
Non-refoulement
Non-refoulement () is a fundamental principle of international law that forbids a country receiving asylum seekers from returning them to a country in which they would be in likely danger of persecution based on "race, religion, nationality, member ...
does not apply to it.
Criticism
Some experts have contended that non-refoulement is a rule of customary international law i.e. it is a
peremptory norm
A peremptory norm (also called or ' ; Latin for "compelling law") is a fundamental principle of international law that is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is permitted.
There is no universal a ...
. Also, since no legislation has specifically been passed for matters concerning refugees in India, no distinction is made between an illegal immigrant and a refugee.
References
{{Reflist
Indian constitutional case law
Supreme Court of India cases
2017 in case law