State Bureau, Ranchi: A hearing took place in the Supreme Court on Friday regarding the issue of Bangladeshi infiltration in Jharkhand. Following the hearing, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the central government and the petitioner. A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and A. Amanullah instructed both the central government and petitioner Daniel Danish to file their responses. The next hearing is scheduled for December 3.
The Jharkhand state government filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging an order from the Jharkhand High Court, which had directed the state government to suggest names for a fact-finding committee. During the hearing, the Supreme Court stated that, for now, the state government should not comply with this High Court directive.
“Jharkhand is not a border state”
The Supreme Court will proceed with the hearing after responses are received from the central government and the petitioner. The High Court, on September 20, had suggested the formation of a fact-finding committee to investigate the truth of the Bangladeshi infiltration allegations. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Jharkhand government, argued that Jharkhand is not a border state. The High Court’s order has become a topic of speeches during the ongoing assembly elections in the state.
“Central government’s claim lacks statistical basis”
Sibal added that the central government’s claims of infiltration in Jharkhand are not based on data. In this context, the High Court’s order to form a fact-finding committee would interfere with the state government’s autonomy and powers to address the issue. The state government has independent authority under the law to deal with such problems.
Public Interest Litigation filed by Daniel Danish
Daniel Danish had filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Jharkhand High Court, which took the allegations of Bangladeshi infiltration seriously. The central government informed the High Court that the tribal population in various areas of Jharkhand, including Santhal Pargana, has been affected. The court was told that large parcels of land are being given to people from the Muslim community in tribal areas through gift deeds, with instances of Muslim men marrying tribal women to gain control over land. Subsequently, the High Court suggested forming a fact-finding committee to investigate these claims and asked the central and state governments to suggest officials for the committee.
