theTripurapost News Images

High Court Dismisses Public Interest Litigation Filed On Illegal Immigration Issue

  • By Thetripurapost Desk, Agartala
  • Jul 11, 2025
  • 418

The Tripura High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed on the issue of illegal immigrants. 

The case was filed prematurely. The bench of judges has advised the petitioners to approach the court again after two to three months if necessary action is not taken.

A division bench of the Tripura High Court comprising Chief Justice Apresh Kumar Singh and Justice Biswajit Palit on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking urgent action against illegal immigration from neighbouring countries like Bangladesh and Myanmar.

Senior advocate Manish Goswami, appearing for the petitioners, said the PIL was filed by Dr. Vijay Debbarma, convener of the Joint Action Committee, and John Debbarma, a student leader associated with the Tipra Students Federation (TSF). The petition highlighted the increasing cases of illegal border crossing and sought the intervention of the judge to compel the state to implement the Centre's directives.

Quoting a Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) notification issued in May 2025, advocate Shri Goswami said, “The Centre has outlined a four-step approach to deal with illegal immigrants — identification, trial, detention and deportation. 

The court has been asked to direct the Tripura government to set up necessary infrastructure, including a foreigners’ tribunal and detention centre.” 

He added that the petitioners had earlier submitted a formal representation deputation to the state government on June 24, requesting it to clarify how the Home Ministry’s instructions were planned to be implemented.

Advocate Manish Goswami pointed out that Assam is the only northeastern state with an effective infrastructure to deal with illegal immigrants. He has approached the court for similar measures in Tripura in the interest of national and regional security.

He said that the high court has refused to issue any directions at this stage. The court has advised the petitioners to wait for the response of the state government. The court felt that the matter was raised in a hurry. 

The court has asked the petitioners to wait for two to three months and if no concrete action is taken, then they should approach the court again.