India Not a Dharamshala: Supreme Court Rejects Sri Lankan's Plea Against Deportation

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by a Sri Lankan Tamil man seeking to stay in India after completing a prison sentence, firmly stating that the country cannot serve as a sanctuary for refugees from across the globe.

A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and K Vinod Chandran rejected the petitioner’s argument that he faced a threat to his life if returned to Sri Lanka, saying, *“Is India to host refugees from all over the world? We are already struggling with a population of 140 crore. This is not a dharamshala where we can entertain foreign nationals from everywhere.”*

The petitioner, who was convicted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and served a seven-year sentence, had challenged a Madras High Court order directing his deportation. His counsel argued that he had remained in detention for nearly three years post-sentence without any deportation proceedings being initiated. He also pointed out that the man had entered India legally on a visa and that his wife and children were already living in the country.

Despite the arguments presented, the court wasn't convinced. Justice Datta asked, "What right do you have to settle here?" He emphasized that the right to live and settle in India, under Article 19, is only for Indian citizens.

He further clarified that Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, had not been violated, as the detention was lawful.

“Go to some other country,” the bench told the petitioner, as it upheld the High Court’s decision and cleared the way for his deportation.