SC remarks in Sri Lankan Tamil refugee case inhumane, says CPM state secretary P Shanmugam
The petitioner had sought permission to remain in India, citing the poor health of his family members and the threat to his life if he were to return to Sri Lanka

CPM state secretary P Shanmugam
CHENNAI: Communist Party of India (Marxist) state secretary P Shanmugam on Monday criticised the Supreme Court for what he described as "inhumane" and "legally inappropriate" language used against a Sri Lankan Tamil refugee during the hearing of a petition seeking asylum.
The petitioner had sought permission to remain in India, citing the poor health of his family members and the threat to his life if he were to return to Sri Lanka. The case was heard by a Bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Vinod Chandran.
"The remarks made by the judges were not only devoid of compassion but also exceeded the legal boundaries of judicial conduct," Shanmugam said in a statement. "While it is within the court's jurisdiction to accept or reject a petition, matters concerning refugee status and citizenship are linked to governmental policy, not judicial discretion."
Referring to the Bench's observation that India is not a "dharamshala" (a public resthouse or shelter) and the suggestion that the petitioner can go to another country, CPM state secretary said such language was incompatible with the principles of human dignity. "No court has the right to ask someone to leave the country. It may decide whether a person can stay in India or not, but to go beyond that is neither lawful nor humane," he said.
He also expressed concern over what he termed an emerging trend of judges expressing personal views during hearings. "There is a growing tendency among members of the judiciary to make regressive and inappropriate remarks under the guise of personal observations. These should not find a place in any official record," he said.
Shanmugam urged the Chief Justice of India to intervene and ensure that such language does not feature in future proceedings. "The judiciary must uphold the values of the Constitution and protect human dignity in both its judgments and oral observations," he added.

