New Delhi, May 16, 2025 — The Supreme Court of India on Friday refused to impose a stay on the deportation of Rohingya refugees, rejecting a plea that accused the Indian government of forcefully expelling 43 Rohingya individuals, including children, women, elderly people, and individuals suffering from serious illnesses like cancer.
The petitioners claimed that the deportees were thrown into international waters, sparking allegations of human rights violations. However, the court ruled that the claims were not substantiated by concrete evidence.
Bench Rejects Urgency and Evidence Cited as Inadequate
A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Kothareshwar Singh heard the matter. Justice Kant noted that a three-judge bench had already considered a similar petition on May 8 and declined to intervene. “The material presented lacks credibility. There is no compelling reason to revisit the earlier decision,” the bench observed.
Petitioners had asked for an expedited hearing, citing a report from the United Nations which stated that the Rohingya were detained and expelled. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the petitioners, implored the court to hear the matter urgently before the deportees “perish.” However, the bench dismissed the request, asserting that any consideration of the UN report would require a full bench deliberation.
“A Story Without Substance” – Court Questions Petitioner’s Claims
The judges questioned the basis of the allegations. “Every day you bring a new narrative. What is the foundation of this particular story? It sounds well-crafted, but where is the evidence?” asked Justice Kant.
Gonsalves alleged that some Rohingya individuals were taken to the Andaman coast and dumped at sea. Justice Kant responded with skepticism: “Who witnessed this? Who recorded the video? Was the petitioner present? How do you substantiate this if the petitioner is sitting in Delhi?”
The court challenged the reliability of phone call-based claims made by the petitioners, to which Gonsalves responded that the information came through relatives of the deported individuals and was recorded from near the Myanmar coast. He argued that the Indian government could verify the recording if it wished.
UN Report Mentioned, But Court Prioritizes Sovereignty
Gonsalves cited involvement from the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR), saying it had taken cognizance and begun an investigation. Justice Kant remarked, “Please bring such reports on record. We will review them. But outside institutions cannot challenge our national sovereignty.”
When the bench proposed clubbing this plea with pending matters concerning Rohingya refugees, Gonsalves urged the court to place an immediate stay on deportations. He referenced the NHRC v. State of Arunachal Pradesh case, where the court had protected the rights of non-citizens like the Chakma community.
“Rohingya’s Legal Status Disputed” – Supreme Court Cites Precedents
Justice Kant clarified that the Chakma case was different, as the government had shown willingness to consider citizenship for that group. In contrast, he said, there is a “serious dispute” about whether the Rohingya qualify as refugees under Indian law.
Gonsalves invoked a ruling from the International Court of Justice, which had acknowledged the risk of genocide faced by Rohingya in Myanmar. The court questioned what new and “shocking” revelations had emerged since the May 8 hearing that warranted fresh intervention. Gonsalves replied that relevant information only came to light after the court’s last ruling.
Supreme Court Maintains Position: Deportation to Proceed as per Law
The petitioners asserted that over 8,000 Rohingya in India possess UNHCR identity cards and that roughly 600 Rohingya living in Delhi may now face expulsion to a war-torn region. Justice Kant reiterated the May 8 decision, stating, “If they have the right to stay, that will be recognized. If not, they will be deported following due process under the law.”
Earlier, the court had been informed that on May 7, several Rohingya were deported overnight. However, based on a submission from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who confirmed that the government was following earlier Supreme Court directives to deport foreigners legally, the bench declined to intervene.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for July 31, 2025. Until then, the court has left the matter to be addressed through established legal procedures.
