The Supreme Court on Friday rapped petitioners who claimed 43 Rohingya refugees including women and children were dropped in the Andaman sea for deportation to Myanmar and said “when the country is passing through a difficult time, you come out with fanciful ideas”.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh also questioned the authenticity of materials placed before it by petitioner Mohd Ismail and others and refused to stay any further deportation of Rohingyas, saying similar relief was denied by the court.
“When the country is passing through a difficult time, you come out with such fanciful ideas,” the bench told senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the petitioners.
It said the materials placed by petitioners appeared to be taken from social media and termed the averments of torture and deportation of Rohingyas by throwing them into the sea as “mere allegations”.
AD
“Where is the material substantiating the allegations?” Justice Kant asked.
The bench said the recording of the alleged phone call conversation between those who were deported and the Delhi-based petitioner was not verified.
“Did anyone verify these phone calls that they originated from Myanmar? Earlier, we heard a case where calls were made from Jamtara in Jharkhand from phone numbers of the US, UK and Canada,” Justice Kant scoffed.
AD
When Mr Gonsalves tried to refer to the report of the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, saying it had also taken note of the issue and started an inquiry into the matter, the bench said, “People sitting outside cannot dictate our authorities and sovereignty.”
The bench, however, asked Mr Gonsalves to serve a copy of the petition to the office of the attorney general and the solicitor general for the purpose of transmitting it to the authorities concerned in the government and posted the hearing before a three-judge bench on July 31.
“There is absolutely no material in support of the vague, evasive and sweeping statements made. Unless the allegations are supported with some prima facie material, it is difficult for us to sit over an order passed by a larger bench,” it said.
The top court termed the averments made in the petition as a “beautifully crafted story using flowery language” and said it would comment on the report of the UN body while sitting in a combination of a three-judge bench.
Mr Gonsalves was further asked, “Every day you come with a new story. What is the basis of this story? Where is the material to substantiate your allegations?”
He alleged that after the last hearing on May 8, several Rohingyas were deported after being taken to Andaman and they were dropped in the sea. He said they have now been put in a “war zone” and are facing the risk of getting killed.
He said they have got a phone call from one of them, which has been put on record.
On May 8, the top court said if Rohingyas refugees in the country were found to be foreigners under Indian laws, they would have to be deported.
The court then referred to its order and remarked that the identity cards issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) may not be of any help to them under the law.
The top court was informed that some refugees having UNHCR cards, including women and children, were arrested by police authorities late last night and deported, despite a hearing on May 15.
“If they (Rohingyas) are all foreigners and if they are covered by the Foreigners’ Act, then they will have to be dealt with as per the Foreigners’ Act,” it said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, referred to the April 8, 2021, order of the court and said it bound the government to take deportation action in accordance with law.
Referring to the UNHCR cards, Mr Mehta said India was not a signatory to the refugee convention.
The April 2021 order said the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 are available to all persons who may or may not be citizens but the right of 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).
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
