Calcutta High Court Rules No Deportation to Bangladesh Based Solely on Suspicion
The Calcutta High Court has ruled that an individual cannot be classified as a Bangladeshi national and deported solely based on suspicion or unverified statements. Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya raised serious questions regarding the detention and proposed deportation of Sahidul Sheikh, a resident of Murshidabad in West Bengal who has been in custody since August 8. The court stayed the September 28 deportation order issued against him and directed that the case be placed before an appropriate bench for further hearing on October 14.
The legal action originated when Mr. Sahidul’s wife, Dejina Bibi, filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that her husband had been illegally detained. Mr. Sahidul, a 34-year-old farmer residing in Dubapara, Murshidabad with his wife and three children, was picked up by Raninagar Police on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant. In response to the petition, the state government submitted reports from the local police and the Superintendent of Police claiming that Sahidul was living in India without a valid passport or visa.
During the proceedings, the state government sought to justify the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) detention order by citing confidential intelligence gathered during a Ministry of Home Affairs operation. State Counsel Rajdeep Majumder argued that Sahidul confessed to crossing the border illegally and that relatives of Kalam Sheikh, whom Mr. Sahidul claimed as his father, denied knowing him. The state further alleged that Mr. Sahidul forged documents, arguing that such allegations constitute sufficient grounds for suspicion and deportation.
Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya strongly questioned the basis of identifying Mr. Sahidul as a Bangladeshi national without presenting logical, concrete evidence. Observing that official identification documents like Voter ID, Aadhaar, and PAN cards were found in Mr. Sahidul’s possession, the judge remarked that merely stating someone is an illegal citizen is insufficient and that family statements cannot prove nationality. He pointedly asked how many people crossed the border during the 1970s and whether they could be deported based solely on family statements.
The High Court highlighted that Sahidul was denied an opportunity to present his case before the FRRO before the issuance of the deportation order. Emphasizing that detention and deportation orders must contain sound logic and supporting evidence rather than arbitrary claims, the court halted all deportation proceedings. Until the next scheduled hearing on October 14, the state government has been asked to provide further clarification regarding the procedural legality of the detention process.
