'Why 270 Persons Lying Detained In Transit Camps?': Supreme Court Asks Assam Chief Secretary To Appear, Probes Steps Taken To Deport

Disappointed with Assam government's affidavit in a matter pertaining to detention of foreign nationals at a transit camp, the Supreme Court today directed Chief Secretary of the state to appear before it (through virtual mode) on the next date and explain non-compliance with the court's earlier order seeking information.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and N Kotiswar Singh passed the order, while dealing with the issue of deportation of about 270 persons in the detention centre/transit camp at Assam, including 66 from Bangladesh. Earlier, it had asked Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Assam government to state how they planned to deport the said foreign nationals.

The order was dictated thus: "Time of 6 weeks was granted to the state to file compliance affidavit. We expected the state to put on record reasons for detaining 270 foreign nationals in the transit camp and details of the steps taken by the state government for deporting the detenus in detention camp. We find from the annexure to the affidavit that some of the foreigners are languishing in the camps for about 10 years and more. The affidavit does not give any justification for detaining 270 persons and moreover steps taken to deport them are not set out. This is gross violation of orders of this court. We direct Chief Secretary of the State of Assam to remain present through VC and explain the non-compliance."

Listing the matter on February 5, the Court further directed the state to comply with the first part of the direction issued on December 9, 2024, as per which an Addl Chief Secretary of the state was to visit the detention camp and file a report.

Notably, after the order was dictated, counsel for the State of Assam took a stand that the affidavit(s) filed be kept in a sealed envelope as the contents were sensitive. Surprised, Justice Oka asked him to explain as to how the contents were "sensitive". When the counsel claimed that the affidavit contained addresses of foreign nationals, and the same could be divulged as the present case is a PIL, it was added in the order that the Chief Secretary explain the stance taken on "confidentiality".

"Ld. counsel appearing for State of Assam states that affidavits filed should be kept in sealed cover, as contents thereof are confidential. Though we are directing that the affidavits should be kept in sealed envelope, prima facie we disagree with the ld. counsel that there is something confidential about the contents of the affidavit. We direct the Chief Secretary of the state to file an affidavit before the next date justifying the stand taken about confidentiality."

After dictating the above, Justice Oka remarked that the stance taken about confidentiality indicated that the state did not wish to come clean.

The hearing began with Justice Oka expressing dissatisfaction with Assam's affidavit, saying that it was "completely defective" insofar as the state was asked to explain why so many persons were being detained in the camp but no answer was forthcoming.

"What we had said in our order...we want justification why these persons are continued to be detained in detention centres without even process being started for deportation? We are not able to understand any explanation from your affidavit. There are 270 foreigners...at the cost of the state, why these persons should be detained?", asked the judge, while probing as to when the state plans to send back the foreign nationals.

When Assam's counsel said that the persons were detained only after they were declared "foreigners" by Foreigners' Tribunal, the judge asked as to why deportation process had not begun if the persons had been so declared by the Tribunal?

At this point, Assam's counsel explained that the deportation process of illegal migrants takes place through the Union government. Referring to Union of India's affidavit in another case, he urged that complete details of (declared) illegal migrants, including contact address, are to be provided by state government to Ministry of External Affairs, which then verifies the identifies of the migrants through diplomatic channels.

"But why this procedure is not being followed"?, asked Justice Oka in response, highlighting that the persons are being detained at state expense and have rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The judge further underlined that the state must give data on whether there are pending cases against the migrants, or the cases have resulted in conviction/acquittal, and if so, whether the relevant orders have become final. Noting that some persons were undergoing detention since 2012, Justice Oka also remarked that it was a "sad state of affairs" that the state counsel was not able to explain the steps taken to deport the persons in question.

Subsequently, Assam's counsel mentioned that nationality verification of 203 illegal migrants is pending before the Central government. Justice Oka, however, pointed out that the affidavit did not mention when the identity verification process was started, why it was pending and what follow-up steps had been taken by the state. "[You] will send over a form and sleep over it? They are detained in your state! There is no responsibility on your shoulders? You simply allow them to be detained for years together".

The judge further enquired from the counsel about the steps taken to deport the 62 persons mentioned on the first page of the chart filed by the state. When it was informed that the foreign addresses of the said illegal migrants were not known, the judge underlined that atleast their nationality was known.

Though Assam's counsel insisted that the state has taken steps for deportation of the concerned migrants, the bench was dissatisfied with the response on account of the affidavit being silent on most aspects. Ultimately, time was sought on behalf of the state to file a detailed affidavit.

Earlier proceedings in the case

In May, the Court had directed the Union Government to take immediate steps for deporting 17 declared foreigners detained in transit camp(s) of Assam, considering no cases were pending against them.

In July, the Court flagged “sorry state of affairs” after a report by the Assam Legal Services Authority highlighted issues like inadequate water supply, poor sanitation, and insufficient toilet facilities in the detention centre(s). At that time, the Court expressed concern over the substandard conditions under which declared foreigners were being held.

In October, the Court directed Assam LSA to conduct unannounced inspections at the Matia Transit Camp to assess the facility's hygiene, food quality, and overall living conditions. This inspection was to verify claims made by the state government in a compliance affidavit that it had improved conditions at the camp.

In December, the Court directed Assam government to file a comprehensive affidavit on the following aspects/documents: (i) Names of persons detained in the detention camp; (ii) Documents justifying their detention in the camp; and (iii) Steps taken by the State government for deporting the detenus in the camp.

Case Title: Rajubala Das v. Union of India and Anr., Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 234/2020

Click Here To Read/Download Order