New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday, September 17, issued notice to the Centre while hearing a plea filed by Sahin Akhtar, who alleged his mother was illegally deported to Bangladesh despite being an Indian citizen.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana sought the Centre’s response in four weeks. Senior advocate S Muralidhar and advocate Prasanna S appeared for Akhtar, who also challenged his mother’s detention and forcible removal from India into Bangladesh.
The petition also challenged the legality of the Standard Operating Procedure dated May 2, 2025 titled “Procedure for deportation of illegal Bangladeshi nationals/Rohingya-regarding” (SOP) and the Immigration and Foreigners Order, 2025, insofar as it permits or facilitates removal of persons apprehended within India without the safeguards prescribed by law and the Constitution.
It said that the woman has at all times been lawfully present in India and has never entered the country illegally, and was instead wrongfully and forcibly removed from a country to which she has always rightfully belonged.
A permanent resident with multiple identity records
The term “push-out” is used to correctly locate the illegality in this act of removal, rather than in the petitioner’s entry.
“She is a permanent resident of Gobindapur, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal. Her Indian identity and longstanding connection with West Bengal are supported by her identity and civil documents and by historical electoral records. The name of her grandfather, Badsa Gazi, appears in the electoral roll of 1952, while the names of her parents appear in the 2002 electoral roll,” the plea said.
It added that her name was subsequently deleted from the electoral roll during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise and this deletion has been challenged before the competent tribunal and the same does not constitute a determination of her nationality.
Forcibly taken, branded as Bangladeshi in Mumbai
The plea claimed that the woman had travelled to Mumbai about 20 years ago with her husband in search of livelihood and worked there as a domestic worker.
“On July 19, 2026, she was intercepted in Mumbai by persons identifying themselves as police personnel, forcibly apprehended and taken to a detention facility. Her identity documents and mobile phone were taken from her. No fair inquiry into her nationality was undertaken and she was not afforded an effective opportunity to establish her Indian citizenship,” it said.
The plea claimed that the woman remained in custody for more than 100 hours without being produced before a judicial magistrate, without being informed of the grounds of detention, without access to legal representation and without communication with her family.
‘She is an Indian, but was branded as Bangladeshi’
Earlier, Sahida’s husband, Junman, had said that police officers took her phone and Aadhaar card after branding her as a Bangladeshi. Sahida told him during their meeting at the police station that officers forcibly dragged her to a building where individuals accused of being “illegal immigrants” were being held. He alleged that his wife was detained because she was a Bengali.
“After approximately five days, she was handed over to the Border Security Force (BSF), transported towards the northeastern region and, while remaining in BSF custody, taken to an international border and forcibly pushed into Bangladesh. No judicial determination of her nationality, deportation proceeding, consular verification or meaningful opportunity to contest the allegation of Bangladeshi nationality was afforded to her,” the plea read.
Junman learned that Sahida was sent to Bangladesh on July 23. “I told them they had made a great mistake. She is an Indian. Where will she go? How will she fend for herself?” he said.
Sahida later called him from Bangladesh to inform him that she was living with a family in Satkhira. Junman questioned the validity of the process, saying she had all the documents. “She is an Indian. But she was branded as Bangladeshi and sent to Bangladesh. I am unable to accept that. Why did they do it? I will fight it legally.”
Plea demands Sahida’s immediate return
The plea sought directions to the Centre and other authorities to produce Sahida before the court, upon taking all the necessary steps for the safe, immediate and unconditional return/repatriation of her from Bangladesh to India, for the purpose of setting her at liberty.
It sought a declaration that her deportation was illegal and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution and to declare that the action of the authorities constitutes an actionable wrong against her.
