‘Religious Persecution Claims In Assam Are Misinformation’: Gauhati HC Slams Media Reports

Last Updated:September 06, 2025, 15:08 IST

The judges also recalled historical warnings that had flagged the dangers of unchecked influx from Bangladesh and its long-term impact on Assam’s indigenous population

The bench further clarified that Article 22, which guarantees safeguards in preventive detention, excludes foreigners.

The Gauhati High Court recently dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking the release of his mother, who had long been declared a foreign national, while making scathing observations against attempts to portray Assam’s immigration crisis as religious persecution.

The division bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund, in an order dated August 21, 2025, ruled that constitutional safeguards extended to Indian citizens cannot be claimed by foreigners. The court said efforts to frame the state’s actions against illegal migrants as persecution were part of “misinformation warfare" targeting Assam and the country.

The petitioner, Abdul Mozid Ali, approached the court after his mother, Jarina Bibi alias Jarina Khatun of Dhubri district, was taken into custody again on May 24 this year and shifted to the Holding Centre at Charaikhola, Kokrajhar. Jarina had been declared a foreign national by the Dhubri Foreigners Tribunal in 2012, a decision upheld by the high court in 2015 and later reaffirmed in 2017 and 2019. Though she was released in 2019 following a Supreme Court direction to decongest detention centres during the pandemic, the state re-detained her this year.

Ali argued that her continued custody violated Articles 21, 22, and 39A of the Constitution. The state countered that as a declared foreign national, she could not invoke constitutional protections meant for citizens and was lawfully kept in a holding centre pending expulsion.

The bench sided with the state’s position, noting that granting her the rights of a citizen would amount to giving her a “special premium".

The court drew heavily from the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005), which equated unchecked migration into Assam with “external aggression". It remarked that large-scale illegal migration had altered the state’s demographic balance, stoked student unrest, and triggered serious security concerns.

“It may be stated that it is perhaps a wrong perception in a section of media report projecting that a religious persecution is going on in the State of Assam, which appears to be an example of misinformation warfare being carried out against the Country in general and the State of Assam in particular," the bench observed.

The judges also recalled historical warnings, including writings of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and reports of former Assam Governor Lt. Gen. SK Sinha, both of which flagged the dangers of unchecked influx from Bangladesh and its long-term impact on Assam’s indigenous population.

The bench further clarified that Article 22, which guarantees safeguards in preventive detention, excludes foreigners. Citing the precedent in Hans Muller of Nurenburg (1955), it reiterated that the Union government holds absolute power to expel foreigners. The court stressed that detention in a holding centre is not equivalent to criminal arrest under the CrPC or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Noting that the 2019 bail was a temporary relief granted during the pandemic, the court said it did not bar the state from resuming custody once conditions changed. It also remarked that even advanced nations like the United States were grappling with the consequences of illegal immigration.

Concluding the matter, the court dismissed the petition, holding that Jarina Bibi’s detention was legal and that no constitutional rights had been violated. It also urged the government to devise a clear policy for the expulsion of foreigners declared by tribunals in Assam.

Salil Tiwari

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...Read More

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...

Read More

News india ‘Religious Persecution Claims In Assam Are Misinformation’: Gauhati HC Slams Media Reports

Read More