SC asks Centre if it can presume someone Bangladeshi migrant on basis of Bengali language, gives a week's time

“We would like you to clarify the bias – the use of a language as a presumption of being a foreigner,” Justice Bagchi has been quoted as saying by Bar and Bench to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Union government.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the petitioners, submitted that a pregnant woman, Sunali Bibi, had been forcibly pushed across the border merely because she spoke Bengali.

“This lady has been pushed out forcibly from the country -- she is pregnant -- without any proof that she is a foreigner. They are saying, Bengali language is a Bangladeshi language. Therefore, people speaking Bengali are Bangladeshis. How can any authority push out any person without any determination whether so and so is a foreigner?” he reportedly said.

Bhushan pointed out that Bangladeshi authorities had arrested her on the ground that she was Indian. “Sometimes these BSF people say, you run away to that side or we will shoot you,” he added.

Justice Kant clarified that the habeas corpus petition filed before the Calcutta High Court regarding the woman should not be delayed because of the present proceedings. “We clarify that the issue before this Court is different and has no bearing on the writ petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus before High Court. We request High Court to immediately take up the [case] and pass appropriate orders,” he said.

Bhushan told the Court that no authority should be allowed to deport anyone without a tribunal or government order. “If there is a FIR they can detain. But thousands of people are being detained because they are speaking Bengali,” he told the Bench.

On this, Justice Kant reportedly said that foreigners’ tribunals existed only in Assam, to which Bhushan told the Court that in practice, Border Security Force (BSF) personnel acted on their own, and ask them to run away or they will be shot.

According to the report, Justice Bagchi said that any person found within India’s territory must be treated in accordance with law.

Solicitor General Mehta, however, questioned why organisations, and not individuals, were approaching the Court. “Why these organisations come before the Court? Let some individual come. India is not the world’s capital for illegal immigrants,” he said, adding that the government was only trying to prevent illegal migrants from “eating away at our resources.”

Justice Bagchi acknowledged security concerns but rejected presumptions based on identity markers such as language. “There are two very sensitive issues. One is our national security. That goes without saying. At the same time, we have an inherited legacy of common culture. We request you to clarify this stance,” Justice Bagchi has been quoted as saying.

The Court directed the Central government to file a reply within a week, and clarified that the habeas corpus petition concerning Sunali Bibi would proceed independently before the Calcutta High Court. The matter will be heard again in September.