Archive · 7 Nov 2025
Gauhati HC Upholds Assam's Power to Expel Foreign Nationals, Calls Illegal Immigration 'External Aggression'
Imagine Assam is like a house, and people who are not supposed to be in the house keep coming in without permission.
The court said that this is a big problem, like an outside attack, that can make the people who belong in the house feel like strangers.
If someone is officially told they don't belong in the house (like a 'foreign national' in India), they can't use the house rules that are only for the family members.
This means they don't get the same rights to stay, move around, or work inside the house anymore.
The court explained that when someone is told they don't belong and needs to leave, it's called 'expulsion' if they came in without permission.
This is different from 'deportation,' which is for people who were allowed in but stayed too long.
The court decided that the process for these people is allowed and their stay isn't against the rules.
Gauhati High Court ruled that illegal immigration into Assam constitutes 'external aggression' and threatens national security.
The court upheld Assam's authority to expel individuals declared as foreign nationals.
A declared foreign national loses constitutional rights, including the right to reside and move freely in India.
The court distinguished between 'expulsion' for illegal entrants and 'deportation' for overstayers.
A habeas corpus petition concerning the detention of Majibar Rahman alias Majibar Sheikh was dismissed, allowing his expulsion.
- Who
- The Gauhati High Court, a habeas corpus petitioner Rejiya Khatun, and her husband Majibar Rahman alias Majibar Sheikh (declared foreign national).
- What
- The Gauhati High Court upheld the power of the State of Assam to expel declared foreign nationals, describing illegal immigration as 'external aggression' and stating that declared foreign nationals lose constitutional protections.
- When
- Observations made while dismissing a habeas corpus petition; Rahman declared foreign national in July 2019, detained, released in 2021, apprehended again in May 2025.
- Where
- Assam, India (specifically mentioning Chirang district and Foreigners Tribunal, Kajalgaon).
- Why
- To uphold national unity and internal security against the perceived threat of large-scale illegal immigration from Bangladesh and to clarify the legal process for dealing with declared foreign nationals.
Petitioner's Stance
Court's Ruling
Rights of Declared Foreign Nationals
Petitioner's Stance
Rejiya Khatun argued her husband's continued custody violated constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22, as no grounds of detention were provided.
Court's Ruling
The High Court ruled that a person declared a foreign national by a Tribunal cannot claim constitutional rights like those under Articles 19 or 21, including the right to reside or pursue a vocation.
Nature of Custody and Process
Petitioner's Stance
Khatun claimed her husband was taken away by police without reason, suggesting illegal detention.
Court's Ruling
The court stated that detention pending expulsion of a declared foreign national is not equivalent to arrest under criminal law and is a lawful process.
Characterization of Infiltration
Petitioner's Stance
The case indirectly touches upon the impact of infiltration on individuals and families.
Court's Ruling
The court described the continued influx of illegal migrants as 'external aggression,' a grave threat to India's unity and internal security, impacting Assam's demographic structure.
- Court
- Gauhati High Court
- Case
- Habeas Corpus petition by Rejiya Khatun
- Declared Foreign National
- Majibar Rahman alias Majibar Sheikh
- Declaration Date
- July 2019
- Custody Details
- Held in detention for over two years, released in 2021, taken again in May 2025.
- Legal Basis
- Upholding the State's power to expel declared foreign nationals.
- Distinction Made
- Expulsion (for illegal entry) versus Deportation (for overstaying lawful entry).