Illegal immigrants from Banglaesh, Myanmar | Pushback, detention and deportation laws explained

The story so far: New deportations and detentions targeting undocumented immigrants from Bangladesh in many states, including West Bengal, have brought deportation laws to the fore. West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari said on June 7 that 4,800 “illegal spies” have been deported to Bangladesh in the last one month. Mr. Adhikari said “waiting centres” have been set up in the border areas of the state. He has previously said his government’s policy on “illegal spies” is to “identify, delete and deport.”

Gujarat police also detained 362 undocumented Bangladeshi immigrants and interrogated over 782 suspected foreign nationals during the statewide crackdown under “Operation Delta Hunt” launched on June 2, 2026.

According to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, the Union government had constituted a high-level committee on demographic change and was determined to “identify and deport every single person who had infiltrated the country”. These incidents have drawn attention to issues of deportation and refugee rights, with Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma advocating a “push-back” policy against undocumented immigrants from Bangladesh and Myanmar, including the Rohingya.

What is pushback?

Deportation is a formal legal process that usually involves detention, judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, and coordination with the receiving country’s authorities. In contrast, Pushbacks generally refer to the return of individuals across a border outside of the formal deportation process and without the procedural steps normally associated with deportation. Originally, “pushback” is a term from European and American border control and refers to someone being caught mid-crossing and turned back.

The term “kickback” has no legal definition in Indian law. However, the latest government policy from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) distinguishes between formal deportations and the immediate “repatriation” of Bangladeshi or Myanmar nationals apprehended at the border. The legality of such pushbacks is still controversial, particularly where questions arise regarding citizenship verification and procedural safeguards.

Who is an illegal immigrant?

The word “illegal immigrant” is defined in Section 2(1)(b) of the Nationality Act 1955 as a person who enters the country without valid documents or exceeds the permitted time in the country despite having entered with valid documents.

What are the laws regarding this?

In the context of Assam, Section 6A of the Act (Assam Accord) makes special provisions for persons of Indian origin who entered Assam between 1 January 1966 and 25 March 1971. Even if declared foreigners, these individuals may be allowed to register for citizenship after completing a waiting period of 10 years from the date of determination. During this interim period, they are disenfranchised but continue to enjoy all other civil rights. Those who entered after March 25, 1971 and were later found to be foreigners and were sentenced to deportation.

The Aliens Act, 1964 mainly dealt with the issue of deportation in India before the Immigration and Aliens Act, 2025, which repealed the Aliens Act and other colonial laws.

Under the Aliens (Tribunals) Order 1964, Aliens Tribunals were established to determine whether an individual is a foreigner. Following a declaration by the Foreigners Tribunal, under Section 3(2)(c) of the Aliens Act, 1946 (now repealed), persons declared to be foreigners became liable for deportation from Indian territory.

A savings clause ensures the continuity of the law governing identification and deportation even if the 1946 Act has been repealed, by maintaining the validity of rules and actions taken under the repealed law.

The Passport Act 1967 plays a role in determining persons liable for deportation. Authorities may reject, confiscate or cancel passports if the applicant is not a citizen of India or if issuance of the passport would be contrary to public interest, national security or foreign relations.

Chapter 12 regulates offenses and penalties for violations of passport rules, such as traveling without a valid document, providing false information or misusing passports.

What are the main provisions of the Immigration and Aliens Act 2025?

The Immigration and Aliens Act 2025 contains several provisions directly related to deportation. Although four colonial laws were repealed by the consolidation of this law, the deportation process remained unchanged.

Section 16 of the Act places the burden on the individual to prove Indian citizenship when questioned by authorities, rather than the state having to prove that the person is not a citizen.

Under Article 29, the Central Government may order the removal of a foreigner from India if the person has violated the Act or any order made under the law or if there is an “adverse security report” against him. The term “negative security report” is not defined in the law.

The grounds that may lead to deportation are strengthened by other provisions of the Law. While Section 21 penalizes entry into India without a valid passport or visa, Section 23 penalizes overstaying, violating visa conditions or entering restricted areas without permission. These breaches may form the basis for action under Part 29.

The Act also gives broad powers to the Central Government under Chapter 7 to regulate, restrict or prohibit the continued presence of foreigners in India, including imposing conditions on residence, movement, identification and reporting obligations. In addition, Section 26 empowers police officers not below the rank of Chief Constable to arrest persons suspected of breaching the Act without a warrant.

To support the detection and tracking of aliens, Chapters 10, 12 and 17 require carriers, accommodation providers, educational institutions and medical institutions treating foreign patients to provide prescribed information to the authorities.

How does India deport illegal immigrants?

Deportation in India has been operationalized largely through internal administrative mechanisms and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) by State authorities as per the Centre’s directions.

As per the deportation policy notified by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) earlier this April, all states have been asked to set up a special task force in each district to “detect, identify and deport/return illegal immigrants in Bangladesh and Myanmar” and submit a monthly status report on foreigners with missing or overstayed visas.

States were asked to operate “waiting centers/camps” whose borders were surrounded by 3-meter-high barbed wire to restrict the movements of such undocumented immigrants until they were deported.

“Bangladeshi/Myanmar nationals apprehended at India’s land or sea border will be immediately returned by the designated Border Security Force/Coast Guard after their biometric information (fingerprints and facial photographs) and demographic details are received on the Foreign Identity Portal,” MHA said. he said.

Under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Indian authorities are required to inform consular representatives in the foreign national’s country of their arrest or detention.

Practices in India require asking the arrested foreign national if they would like their consulate to be notified, immediately informing the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and providing detailed information to the relevant authorities.

What did the courts say?

at the Supreme Court Louis De Raedt & Ors vs Union of India and Ors(1991) stated that the fundamental right of a foreigner is limited to Article 21 regarding life and liberty. “It does not include the right to reside and establish in this country as provided for in Article 19(1)(e), which applies only to citizens of this country.”

Supreme Court, Louis DeRaedt“The power of the Government in India to deport foreigners is absolute and unlimited and there is no provision in the Constitution restricting this discretion,” he said, citing an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court.

Indian Courts have considered the principle of non-refoulement, which is a principle of international law that prohibits a state from returning a refugee to a country where his life or freedom would be threatened, within the scope of Article 21.

Inside Nandita Haksar – Manipur State (Manipur High Court), (2021), in relation to Myanmar asylum seekers, the Court held that Article 21 “undoubtedly includes the right of non-refoulement, although this is subject to the condition that the presence of the asylum seeker or refugee in question does not prejudice or prejudice the security of this country.”

Inside Mohammad Salimullah v Union of India(2021) case, the Supreme Court observed: “It is also true that the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 apply to all persons, whether citizens or non-citizens. But the right not to be deported is subordinate to or accompanies the right to reside or settle in any part of the territory of India guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e).” Article 19(1)(e) is applicable only to nationals of this country.

The court nevertheless stipulated that the deportation must be in accordance with the “procedure prescribed for such deportation.”

The question of whether the Rohingyas are undocumented immigrants or ‘refugees’ is still being debated in the Supreme Court. In May last year, the high court had said that if the Rohingyas were found to be ‘foreigners’ within the scope of the Foreigners Act, they would be dealt with by the Center in accordance with the law. The petitioners claim that the Rohingyas are ‘refugees’ under the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and should not be sent back. The Center maintains that India is not a signatory to the Convention and its power is absolute.

But the transition from court-supervised deportation to administrative pushback is where the legal uncertainty lies. While the courts recognized the government’s authority to deport aliens, they also held that such deportation must comply with the procedure prescribed by law.