The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a plea filed by a Sri Lankan national seeking to prevent his deportation after serving a jail term in India. A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and K Vinod Chandran made strong observations, stating that India is not a “dharamshala” or sanctuary for refugees from across the globe.

“Is India to host refugees from all over the world? We are already struggling with a population of 140 crore. This is not a dharmshala where we can entertain foreign nationals from everywhere,” the bench asserted while dismissing the petition.

The Sri Lankan Tamil citizen had approached the apex court challenging a Madras High Court order that mandated his immediate deportation upon completion of his seven-year sentence. The petitioner had been convicted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel argued that his client faced a significant threat to his life if deported back to Sri Lanka. The counsel also pointed out that the petitioner had already spent nearly three years in detention beyond his sentence without any deportation proceedings being initiated. He further submitted that the petitioner had initially entered India on a valid visa and that his wife and children were currently settled in the country.

However, the Supreme Court bench remained unconvinced by these arguments. Justice Datta directly questioned the petitioner’s right to settle in India, asking, “What is your right to settle here?”

When the counsel responded that his client was a refugee, Justice Datta retorted, “Go to some other country,” before ultimately rejecting the plea.

Justice Datta further clarified that the petitioner’s detention was not in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, as it was by the law. He also emphasised that the fundamental right to settle in India, guaranteed under Article 19, is exclusively for Indian citizens.