Supreme Court seeks clarity from government if Bengali speakers are presumed as ‘foreigners’

The Supreme Court on Friday (August 29, 2025) sought clarity from the Centre on a petition claiming authorities presume Bengali speakers are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, leading to bias, discrimination, and “widespread and arbitrary detention” of migrant workers in multiple States, including the national capital, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana.

“We would like you to clarify... The petition seeks to demonstrate there is a certain bias, namely, the use of a particular language becoming the source of a presumption that the speaker is a foreigner. Whether this is correct or not. You clarify that,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of a Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant, orally addressed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government.

The petition filed by an NGO, the West Bengal Migrant Workers Welfare Board, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan, alleged labourers from West Bengal were detained without due verification, procedural safeguards, or compliance with established inter-state coordination protocols. The petition claimed they were deported in spite of documentation proving Indian citizenship. The NGO challenged the detention of migrant workers, particularly in the backdrop of a Home Ministry letter of May 2 “authorising inter-State verification and detention of suspected illegal immigrants”.

Vehemently denying the allegation, Mr. Mehta questioned the bona fide of the petitioner. He countered why none of the aggrieved persons, allegedly facing deportation, had moved court. Justice Kant remarked they may not have the capacity to do so.

Mr. Mehta submitted “India was not the world’s capital for illegal immigrants”. He argued the government was only trying to ensure immigrants did not “eat away our resources which we can divert to our own citizens”. The Solicitor General warned of systematic infiltration and terror elements entering India through porous borders.

Referring to the petitioner, the top law officer asked why “public-spirited citizens” were not helping deportees from the United States. “Public spirit cannot be selective,” Mr. Mehta said.

Justice Kant agreed illegal immigration through porous borders from Assam, Tripura to West Bengal was a reality.

But Justice Bagchi, on a lighter note, reacted with a question: “Mr. Solicitor, do you propose to build a wall like in America?” Mr. Mehta replied in the negative.

“There are sensitive issues here. One is the national security of our country. The integrity of our nation and the preservation of our resources. It goes without saying this is of paramount concern. At the same time, we have to understand we inherit a legacy of common culture and common heritage both in Punjab and Bengal where the language is the same but borders divide us... With this situation in mind, we request you to clarify the stance of the government,” Justice Bagchi said.

Mr. Bhushan asked how any authority could push out people without an order from a court or foreigners’ tribunals, or without securing an agreement with the foreign country. “This has drastic consequences, the Border Security Forces tell them ‘you run away or we will shoot you. But watch out, if Bangladesh Rifles sees you, they will shoot you’,” he submitted.

Justice Bagchi responded that there was a distinction between a person found crossing the international border and someone found inside the Indian territory.

“At the stage of the international border, the country’s security forces have the right of repulsion. But once the person, foreigner or otherwise, is within the Indian land mass, there must be some procedure, which we would call upon the Solicitor General to explain,” the Judge said.

Justice Kant asked the Centre if there was any standard operating procedure. “There is absolutely nothing wrong with security forces forcing back those who try to enter India illegally. But those who are presumed to have entered at one point of time, if you are sending them back, the first thing you ask them is their proof of Indian citizenship,” Justice Kant observed.

Mr. Bhushan alleged the deportations were operating even against the May 2 circular, which mandated that if a person was suspected to be a non-citizen, the authorities had to enquire with the State government concerned.

Justice Bagchi however said authorities had the power to register an FIR under the Foreigners Act and take a person into custody under suspicious circumstances. Mr. Bhushan replied “thousands of people have been put in detention camps, causing panic”.

The Solicitor said illegal immigration has become a problem the world over. European nations were facing this problem in a huge way.

“This is a problem everywhere. Some countries suffer, some try to accommodate. It is a very complicated issue,” Justice Kant remarked, scheduling the case on September 11, 2025.