Gauhati High Court Gives 7 Days to Assam Police’s Border Wing to release “Declared Foreigners” on Bail due to Coronavirus Outbreak

Must Read

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were...

Follow us

The Gauhati High Court has given the border wing of the Assam police seven days to conform with its April 15 order to release on bail ‘declared foreigners’ (DFs) who have finished two years in detention camps.

The court, hearing a petition on Wednesday as regards to the Supreme Court’s April 13 order for releasing the DFs given the worldwide coronavirus outbreak, also asked the Special Director-General of Police (Border) to put up the list of the detainees those who are to be released when the matter is taken up after 10 days.

The border wing is tasked with the detection of suspected “unlawful immigrants” and refer them to any of the 100 existing quasi-judicial Foreigners Tribunals which determine at the snob of the persons detected so that it will be dispatched to a detention centre. Assam has six detention centres.

Justices Ajit Barthakur and Manojit Bhuyan relied that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had modified its May 10, 2019, order to reduce the detention duration of DFs from three to two years and put on relief to them with sureties of ₹5,000 each rather than ₹1 lakh each.

The Supreme court’s order was for decongesting prisons, correctional houses, detention centres and safety houses towards stopping the virus from spreading.

“We’re now making a standard direction for compliance through the respective Superintendents of Police (Border) of all the prevailing 33 districts…,” the Bench passed the order, asking them to first make a list of the names and period of detention of the detainees and ensuring their release on bail after approaching the situations.

The conditions include taking pictures and storing the biometrics of the iris of both eyes and all 10 fingerprints, a formal statement declared that a detainee shall document/report every week to the police station or outpost within verifiable areas of the detainee, after release. The detainee must undertake that they could be liable to be detained once more and tried in a tribunal if any of the other conditions are violated.

“The method has started. In due course of time, records [on the detainees released] can be generated,” stated Deputy Inspector-General of Police (Border) Devojyoti Mukherjee.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Supreme Court : High Courts Have Sole Authority Under Article 226 To Decide Validity of Tax Provision, Even if Matter Is Sub-Judice Before Income...

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the validity of a provision is a serious matter which could only be decided by...

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected to act without any arbitrariness...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s property, without any legal sanction...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to the fact that they were...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were directed to consider the same....

Madras High Court Reiterates That ‘Ignorance of Law’ Is Not an Excuse and Dismisses Petition by a Constable

A Constable committed bigamy and deserted his service for more than 21 days. After dismissal from his service, he moved to Tamil Nadu Administrative...

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the NCLT.  Facts M/s. Girdhar Trading Company, 2nd...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Facts...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -