The Court orders the return of a pregnant woman deported to Bangladesh, reminding the State that humanitarian considerations may override administrative rigidity.
In a remarkable assertion of the judiciary’s humanitarian oversight, the Supreme Court asked the Union government to repatriate one Sonali Khatun, a nine-months pregnant woman, and her eight-year-old son, who were pushed into Bangladesh earlier this year. The Centre gave an undertaking to the Court that it would facilitate the return on compassionate grounds.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered the government to provide Khatun with full medical support, since she is advanced in pregnancy, and take care of the newborn child as well. The Court underscored the point that humanitarian obligations do not evaporate simply because the State is engaged in questions of identity or border management.
Khatun claims she is the daughter of Bhodu Sheikh, an Indian citizen. Justice Bagchi mentioned that Sheikh’s citizenship is beyond dispute and, according to the Citizenship Act, biological lineage would entitle Khatun and her children to Indian citizenship when the claim is verified. This observation put the onus squarely on the authorities to assess the claim rather than resort to summary deportation.
Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the State “must sometimes bend in humanitarian interest,” while ordering the Centre to arrange all facilities necessary for the family’s transfer back to India.
The matter is part of a larger controversy. Sheikh has been pursuing legal remedies to bring back his daughter, son-in-law Danish Sheikh, and their child. A second family—Sweety Bibi, her husband, and their two children—was similarly pushed across the border on 27 June 2025 after being detained on allegations of being illegal Bangladeshi nationals.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the State of West Bengal, asked the Court to also direct the Centre to take instructions with regard to the six other deportees. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered the request saying that the rest are “Bangladeshis,” and the Union has a serious dispute regarding their citizenship status.
The order underlines the Court’s position that administrative claims of illegality do not give the State a blank check to elide due process or humanitarian requirement, especially when claims of citizenship are on the record and must be verified.
We strive to make a lasting impact on India’s policy and planning landscape through fair, unbiased, and incisive research based journalism.
But we can’t do it alone.
Together, we can create a better India, where policies are fair, planning is unbiased, and the truth prevails. Your contribution matters, and we shall be immensely grateful for your support.