Supreme Court: Sahida Fakir Deportation Plea Gets Notice

• The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government regarding the alleged deportation of Sahida Fakir, a West Bengal woman, to Bangladesh.
• Fakir was reportedly detained in Mumbai, held for over 100 hours without a Magistrate appearance, and then pushed into Bangladesh by the Border Security Force.
• Her son's plea argues she is an Indian citizen, citing family names in 1952 and 2002 electoral rolls, and that her name was deleted during a special intensive revision (SIR).
• The petition alleges a complete lack of due process, including no fair inquiry into her nationality, no notice of allegations, and no opportunity to prove her Indian citizenship before deportation.

This Supreme Court intervention highlights critical due process concerns in deportation cases, particularly where nationality is questioned based on electoral roll deletions.

India's Supreme Court recently issued a formal notice to the Central government concerning the alleged deportation of Sahida Fakir, a woman from West Bengal. The directive, issued on a Thursday, came in response to a plea filed by Fakir's son, who is seeking judicial intervention to facilitate his mother's return to India. The case highlights significant concerns regarding the process by which individuals are deemed non-citizens and subsequently removed from the country, particularly following deletions from electoral rolls.

The petition details a series of events leading to Fakir's removal. She was reportedly detained by police in Mumbai and held in custody for over 100 hours without being presented before a Magistrate. Subsequently, she was allegedly pushed across the border into Bangladesh by personnel from the Border Security Force (BSF). This sequence of actions forms the core of the legal challenge, which questions the legality and procedural fairness of her deportation.

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, is presiding over the matter. Senior Advocate S Muralidhar is representing the petitioner, advocating for the woman's right to return to India and for a thorough review of the circumstances surrounding her alleged unlawful deportation. The court's decision to issue notice underscores the gravity of the allegations and the potential implications for due process in similar cases.

The legal challenge brought by Sahida Fakir's son asserts that his mother is a permanent resident of Gobindapur in the North 24 Parganas district of West Bengal. To substantiate her Indian nationality, the petition highlights her family's long-standing ties to the region, noting that her grandfather's name appeared in the 1952 electoral roll and her parents' names were listed in the 2002 electoral roll. These details are crucial in establishing her lineage and claim to Indian citizenship, which the petition argues was disregarded during the deportation process.

Fakir had relocated to Mumbai approximately two decades ago, where she was employed as a domestic worker. The events leading to her alleged deportation began on July 19 of this year when individuals in plain clothes, identifying themselves as police personnel, apprehended her. She was then transported to a holding centre located in Chembur, Mumbai. During this apprehension, her Aadhaar card and mobile phone were reportedly seized without any official receipt being provided, further complicating her ability to prove her identity or communicate.

Central to the son's plea is the assertion that his mother's name was deleted from the electoral roll during a recently concluded special intensive revision (SIR). This deletion, without what the petition describes as a fair inquiry into her nationality, appears to have been a pivotal factor preceding her alleged deportation. The case thus brings into focus the implications of electoral roll deletions for citizenship status and the potential for such administrative actions to precede severe consequences like forced removal from the country.

The petition filed by Sahida Fakir's son raises profound questions about the adherence to due process in her alleged deportation. It explicitly states that prior to her deprivation of liberty, no competent authority conducted a fair inquiry into her nationality. This lack of a proper investigation meant that her documentary records were not examined, nor was she afforded notice of any allegations against her that might challenge her citizenship status.

Crucially, the petition argues that Fakir was denied an effective opportunity to establish her Indian nationality before being pushed into Bangladesh. This alleged failure to provide a fair hearing and the chance to present evidence of her citizenship forms the cornerstone of the legal challenge. The circumstances, including her prolonged custody without judicial oversight and the seizure of personal documents without proper procedure, underscore the procedural lapses highlighted by the petitioner.

This Supreme Court intervention highlights critical due process concerns in deportation cases, particularly where nationality is questioned based on electoral roll deletions. The case could set important precedents regarding the standard of inquiry required before deportation, the rights of alleged undocumented individuals, and the implications for citizenship verification processes in India, especially in light of administrative actions like the special intensive revision of electoral rolls.

This Supreme Court intervention highlights critical due process concerns in deportation cases, particularly where nationality is questioned based on electoral roll deletions. Lawyers should monitor this case for potential precedents regarding the standard of inquiry required before deportation, the rights of alleged undocumented individuals, and the implications for citizenship verification processes in India.

Source: Original reporting via The Economic Times