The Supreme Court on Monday came down sharply on an Israeli businessman residing in Goa who sought to stop the repatriation of two minor girls and their Russian mother, rescued from a forest in Karnataka in July. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi questioned his legal status in the country and the basis of his claim over the children, remarking that India had become a “safe haven” for anyone to come and stay.
Dror Shlomo Goldstein, who claims to be the father of the two girls aged six and five, had moved the Supreme Court challenging a Karnataka High Court order that allowed the Union government to issue travel documents for the family’s repatriation to Russia.
The bench repeatedly pressed Goldstein’s counsel to establish his legal right over the children and his status in India.
“Who are you? What is your right?… Please show us any official document where you are declared as the father of the minors,” Justice Surya Kant said, even asking why the court should not direct Goldstein’s deportation.
Justice Bagchi called the plea a “publicity litigation,” pointedly asking, “What were you doing when your children were living in a cave?”
Justice Kant added, “What were you doing in Goa? Did you have any valid documents to stay in this country? You went to Nepal and extended your visa and then again went to Goa.”
As the bench continued its questioning, Goldstein’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition, which the court allowed. Justice Kant observed during the hearing, “This country has become a safe haven where anybody can come and stay.”
On July 11, 2025, Karnataka Police rescued Nina Kutina, a 40-year-old Russian national, and her two daughters during a routine patrol in the Ramatirtha Hills forest in Gokarna, Kumta taluk. The family had been living there for nearly two months without valid travel or residence documents and was subsequently sent to a Foreigners Restriction Centre for Women.
On September 26, the Karnataka High Court directed the Union government to issue travel documents to facilitate their return to Russia. The court noted that Kutina herself had written to the Russian consulate expressing her wish to return as soon as possible. The consulate subsequently issued emergency travel papers for her and the children, valid until October 9.
Before the high court, Goldstein had opposed the repatriation, arguing that deporting the children would not be in their best interests while custody proceedings were pending. However, the high court found that he had failed to satisfactorily explain why the family was living in isolation in a cave.
The court emphasised the principle of children’s welfare, holding that the mother’s request to return to Russia and the Russian government’s readiness to facilitate their travel outweighed other factors. The Union government also informed the court that DNA tests had confirmed the identity of the second daughter, following which Russian citizenship and emergency travel documents were issued.
Goldstein had earlier lodged a missing complaint at Panaji police station in December 2024 after being unable to trace the children in India.
