New Delhi:
The Supreme Court on Friday wrapped the petitioners, who claimed 43 Rohingya refugees including women and children in the Andaman Sea for deportation to Myanmar and said “When the country is going through a difficult time, you come out with fictional ideas”.
A bench of Justice Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh also questioned the authenticity of the materials put in front of it by the petitioners Mohammad Ismail and others and refused to stop any other exile of the Rohingyas, saying that the court refused a similar relief.
“When the country is undergoing a difficult time, you come out with such fictional ideas,” the bench appeared to the petitioners, “the bench told senior advocate Colin Gonsalves.
It said that the materials kept by the petitioners appeared from social media and threw the average of torture and exile of the Rohingyas as “allegations” by throwing them into the sea.
“Where is the content that confirms the allegations?” Justice Kant asked.
The bench said that the recording of alleged phone call conversation recording and Delhi -based petitioner was not verified among those people.
Justice Kant said, “Anyone verified these phone calls, which originated from Myanmar? Earlier, we heard a case where phone numbers from America, Britain and Canada were called from Jamtara in Jharkhand.”
When Mr. Gonsalves tried to mention the report of the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, he said that it has also paid attention to the issue and started investigating the matter, the bench said, “People sitting outside cannot determine our officers and sovereignty.”
However, the bench asked Mr. Gonsalves to serve a copy of the petition to the Attorney General and Solicitor General to serve a copy of the petition, which posted the hearing before the bench of the three-judges with the aim of broadcasting it to the concerned authorities in the government and on 31 July.
He said, “There is no material in support of unclear, clear and comprehensive statements. Unless the allegations are supported with some prima facial materials, it is difficult for us to sit on an order passed by a large bench,” said this.
The apex court stated the average in the petition as “beautifully designed by using the language of flowers” and said that it would comment on the report of the United Nations Body by sitting in combination with the three-judge bench.
Mr. Gonsalves was further asked, “Every day you come with a new story. What is the basis of this story? Where is the material to confirm your allegations?”
He alleged that after the last hearing on 8 May, several Rohingyas were deported after being taken to Andaman and dropped into the sea. He said that he has now been put in the “war zone” and is facing the risk of being killed.
He said that he has received one of them a phone call, which has been kept on record.
On 8 May, the apex court said that if the Rohingya refugees in the country were found to be foreign under Indian laws, they would have to be deported.
The court then mentioned its order and commented that the UN’s High Commissioner could not help them under the Ident Card Act issued by the Refugees (UNHCR).
The apex court was informed that despite hearing on May 15, some refugees arrested by police officers late last night were arrested, including women and children, including women and children.
“If they (Rohingya) are all foreigners and if they are covered by the Foreigners’ Act, they will be dealt with according to the Act of foreigners,” said this.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared to the Center, referring to the court order on 8 April 2021 and said that it forms the government to take exile according to the law.
Referring to the UNHCR card, Mr. Mehta said that India was not a signator for the refugee conference.
The order of April 2021 states that guaranteed rights under Article 14 and 21 are available to all individuals who can be citizens or not, but the right to not be deported, under Article 19 (1) (E), is helpful or helpful for the right to live or settle in any part of India guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (E).
(Except for the headline, the story has not been edited by NDTV employees and is published by a syndicated feed.)
