October 23, 2026 09:45 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
Tiger Shroff, not Salman Khan, was the main target, probe reveals shocking details | Dammam airport attack: Indian killed, two compatriots injured as Saudi Arabia faces fresh strikes | ‘Among others’: Macron takes swipe at Trump over France unrest, calls foreign leaders’ remarks ‘stupid’ | ‘Specific threat-related inputs’: Delhi Police blocks Diljit Dosanjh’s Delhi concert | ‘Barbaad kare alfaz mere’: Ranbir Kapoor apologises for Dussehra gaffe in Kolkata | Delhi court releases CJP's Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka after 7 days in custody | ‘We are seeing what is happening outside our country’: Delhi HC judge’s remark as CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka withdraw custody plea | Salman Khan was the original target? Tiger Shroff firing probe reveals shocking twist | ‘UN experts are an oxymoron’: Marco Rubio takes swipe at UN, refuses to comment on India's protests | ‘US ties with no country come at India's expense’: Marco Rubio addresses concerns over Pakistan, China
Immigration
Supreme Court of India. Photo: sci.gov.in

‘Red carpet for intruders?’: Supreme Court raps petitioner in Rohingya case

| @indiablooms | Dec 03, 2025, at 10:31 am

New Delhi/IBNS: The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly criticised a petitioner seeking proper deportation procedures for Rohingyas, questioning whether the Indian government had ever recognised the ethnic group as “refugees”.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a habeas corpus plea alleging the custodial disappearance of Rohingyas who were reportedly detained by Delhi Police in May.

Challenging the plea, CJI Kant asked, “Where is the order of the Government of India declaring them refugees? Refugee is a well-defined legal term… If someone has no legal status and enters illegally, do we have an obligation to keep that person here?”

The petitioner’s counsel clarified that the plea neither sought refugee status nor opposed deportation but demanded that due process be followed.

The CJI, however, continued his sharp remarks, pointing to security concerns along India’s northern borders: “If an intruder digs a tunnel or crosses a fence and enters illegally, do we give them a red carpet welcome? After entering illegally, can they then claim entitlement to food, shelter and education?”

The counsel argued the plea only aimed to prevent “third-degree methods” in the deportation process.

In May, a bench led by Justice Kant had earlier dismissed another petition alleging that Indian authorities had picked up Rohingyas and thrown them into the sea, calling it a “beautifully crafted story”.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.