The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea seeking to prevent the deportation of a Sri Lankan Tamil national convicted under anti-terror laws, observing that India is “not a dharamshala (public shelter)” to accommodate refugees from around the world.
A Bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and K Vinod Chandran made this observation while hearing a petition filed by Subaskaran, a Sri Lankan national who was convicted in 2018 for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), the Passport Act, the Foreigners Act, the Poisons Act, and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Subaskaran was arrested in 2015 on allegations of conspiring to revive the banned militant organisation Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which had fought for an independent Tamil state in Sri Lanka. A trial court in Ramanathapuram convicted him in 2018 and sentenced him to 10 years in prison.
In 2022, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court reduced his sentence to seven years. The High Court further directed that Subaskaran should leave India without delay upon completing his sentence. Until then, he was to be kept in a refugee camp.
After his release, Subaskaran’s wife made a representation to the Tamil Nadu government seeking permission for him to continue living in India with his family. When there was no response, she approached the Madras High Court, which rejected her plea. This led to the current petition before the Supreme Court.
Representing Subaskaran, Advocate R Sudhakaran contended that his client had been falsely implicated and would be subjected to torture if deported to Sri Lanka. He urged the Court to allow him to reside in India permanently, even if it meant living in a refugee camp.
However, the Supreme Court was not persuaded. “Is India to host refugees from all over the world? … This is not a dharamshala that we can entertain foreign nationals from all over,” the Bench observed during the hearing.
Refusing to interfere with the Madras High Court’s direction, the Bench dismissed the petition. The Court advised that if Subaskaran truly feared for his life in Sri Lanka, he should explore the possibility of seeking asylum in another country.
