"NO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO STAY IN INDIA": MADRAS HIGH COURT DISMISSES THE PLEA CHALLENGING GOVT'S DECISION TO DEPORT SRI LANKAN NATIONAL BACK The Madras High Court has dismissed a Habeas Corpus and a Writ plea (heard together) challenging the decision taken through the State authorities to deport a Sri Lankan national, who's currently dealing with human trafficking charge in India. The petitioner claimed that State Government's order to deport Bhaskaran (Sri-Lankan national) from India with immediate impact was illegal, because the deportation of Bhaskaran, could cause his murder in Sri Lanka. The Bench of Justice P. N. Prakash and Justice R. Pongiappan disregarded the pleas by observing: "He does not have a fundamental right to stay in India and get Indian citizenship. He knows that his stay in India can't be eternal. He has to leave India one day or the other." The petitioner filed a habeas corpus plea and on the time of admission, the Court had, in August 2020, ordered that the deportation order be kept in abeyance till further orders. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Writ plea for a mandamus directing the respondents to take into account his representation looking for permission for the detenu to appear for an interview before the Switzerland Embassy of New Delhi to get a Humanitarian Visa to land as a refugee in Switzerland. The Counsel for the petitioner, positioned reliance at the photocopy of a letter supposed to had been issued by one Sakthivel Sivakumar, Justice of the Peace (Whole Island), Vavuniya, Sri Lanka, wherein, it was said that he is aware of Bhaskaran's family. Allegedly, the letter averred that Bhaskaran lost his family individuals which includes father & elder brother in the course of the very last phase of Sri Lankan-LTTE war and now, the Intelligence Officers and Terrorists Prevention Unit Officers of the Sri Lankan police are searching out for Bhaskaran. Lastly, it turned into submitted that if he returns to Sri Lanka, he might also additionally face threat to his existence and for this reason it was advised that he must either be allowed to live in a refugee camp in India or allowed to take asylum in Switzerland. However, the Court observed that the stated letter can't be the idea for passing any orders, because, there's no manner by which its authenticity and genuineness may be verified. At the outset, counting on the Government's document, the Court located that Bhaskaran does now no longer revel in the repute of a refugee from Sri Lanka and that he was indulging in human trafficking offences in India. To this, the Court remarked: " That is why, perhaps, Bhaskaran himself has not filed any petition challenging his order of deportation, because, had he filed any petition, he would have been forced to speak the truth that he isn't a Sri Lankan refugee and that he was concerned in criminal cases, in which event, he would not have got the relief." The Court in addition mentioned that the petitioner had now no longer filed the immediate habeas corpus petition and writ petition as the subsequent friend of Bhaskaran and he had not even averred in the affidavits that he has been told by Bhaskaran to file these cases. " It isn't even acknowledged to this Court as to whether or not those petitions were filed through the petitioner with the information of Bhaskaran. Therefore, in this brief floor alone, these petitions deserve to be dismissed," added the Court. Regarding the position of the petitioner, the Court remarked: "The petitioner herein has sworn to an affidavit with out disclosing any detail about the cases against Bhaskaran and has merely stated that Bhaskaran is a Sri Lankan refugee. No action can be taken against the petitioner for filing a fake affidavit, because, he would wriggle out by saying that he acted at the information collected by him and that he did not know the real facts about Bhaskaran. Thus, we sense that the petitioner is playing truant with the legal system to gain an unfair advantage by concealing facts." In this case, the Court in addition stated that Bhaskaran turned into now no longer an Indian national and it was alleged that he turned into concerned in human trafficking. Whether he was acquitted or convicted is immaterial. He does now no longer have a fundamental right to stay in India and get Indian citizenship.