India illegally deporting Muslim citizens at gunpoint to Bangladesh, say rights groups
The Indian government has been accused of illegally deporting Indian Muslims to Bangladesh, prompting fears of an escalating campaign of persecution.
Thousands of people, largely Muslims suspected of being illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, have been rounded up by police across India in recent weeks, according to human rights groups, with many of them deprived of due legal process and sent over the border to neighbouring Muslim-majority Bangladesh.
Indian citizens are among those alleged to have been deported illegally, according to lawyers and accounts by deportees. Those who tried to resist being 'pushed back' were threatened at gunpoint by India's border security force, according to several accounts.
About 200 people have since been returned to India by Bangladeshi border guards after being found to be Indian citizens, with some forced to walk miles across treacherous terrain to get home.
'Instead of following due legal procedure, India is pushing mainly Muslims and low-income communities from their own country to Bangladesh without any consent,' said Taskin Fahmina, senior researcher at Bangladesh human rights organisation Odhikar. 'This push by India is against national and international law.'
Bangladesh's foreign ministry said it had written letters to the Indian authorities urging them to stop sending people over the border without consultation and vetting, as was previous official procedure, but they said those letters had gone unanswered.
Among those deported and returned was Hazera Khatun, 62, a physically disabled grandmother. Khatun's daughter Jorina Begum said they had documents to prove two generations of her mother's family had been born in India. 'How can she be a Bangladeshi?' said Begum.
Khatun was picked up by police on 25 May and the next day was pushed into a van with 14 other Muslims who were then driven to the border with Bangladesh in the middle of the night. There, Khatun said officers from India's Border Security Force (BSF) forced them to cross the border.
'They treated us like animals,' said Khatun. 'We protested that we are Indians, why should we enter Bangladesh? But they threatened us with guns and said, 'We will shoot you if you don't go to the other side.' After we heard four gunshots from the Indian side, we got very scared and quickly walked across the border.'
The group were taken into custody by Bangladesh's border guards, and held in a makeshift camp in a field. However, Khatun said the authorities in Bangladesh would not allow the group to stay as their documents showed they were Indian citizens. They were driven a truck to the border and told to walk to India.
'When we returned, it was terrible,' said Khatun. 'We had to walk through forests and rivers … We were so scared, we thought if the BSF officers found us coming back, they would kill us. I was sure we were going to die.' Eventually she made it back to her village on 31 May. According to her family, she was covered in bruises and deeply traumatised.
The escalating crackdown against so-called 'illegal Bangladeshis' by the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) government comes in the wake of an attack by Islamist militants in the Indian-administered region of Kashmir in April which killed 25 Hindu tourists and a guide, after which the BJP government vowed to expel 'outsiders'.
The mass detentions increased with the launch of Operation Sindhoor in May, when India launched strikes at neighbouring Muslim-majority Pakistan, which it blamed for the Kashmir militant attack and vowed to wipe out terror groups targeting India.
Over its 11 years in power, the BJP government has been accused by rights groups and citizens of persecuting, harassing and disenfranchising the country's 200 million Muslims as part of its Hindu nationalist agenda, charges the government denies.
The most widespread targeting and deporting of Muslims in recent weeks has been in the north-eastern state of Assam, as the BJP-run state government has escalated its long-running campaign against those it calls 'infiltrators'. About 100 people who have been recently detained in the state are missing, according to activists.
The expulsions were described by activists as a worrying escalation of a long-running exercise in Assam to expel 'illegal infiltrators', in which Muslims are routinely called before 'foreigners tribunals', quasi-judicial courts, to prove they were born in India, or arrived before 1971. A controversial citizenship survey also took place in the state in 2019, resulting in thousands being put into detention centres.
Only Muslims have to prove their citizenship after Hindus, Sikhs and other religions were made exempt from the exercise by the state government.
This week, the hardline BJP chief minister of Assam, Himanta Sarma said it was now a policy of the state to automatically expel 'illegal foreigners'. 'This process will be intensified and expedited,' he said.
Not all those deported who claim to be Indian citizens have been able to return. Among those still stuck in Bangladesh is 67-year-old Maleka Begam, 67, from Assam, who was detained by police on 25 May.
Speaking over the phone from a Bangladeshi border village in a state of distress, Begam – who is physically infirm and cannot walk unassisted – said she had been the only woman in a group of about 20 Muslims sent over to Bangladesh in the middle of the night on 27 May. She said they were ordered at gunpoint by the BSF to cross the border.
Begam's son Imran Ali said his mother had documentation to prove she was born in India, and that all seven of her siblings also had proof. 'Her deportation to Bangladesh is completely illegal. However, I cannot understand now how we can bring her back from Bangladesh. She is old and sick. We are very anxious about her,' said Ali.
Assam police and the BSF did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
Hundreds of people, mostly Muslims, have also been deported from the capital, Delhi, as well as the states of Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra. In Gujarat, the police claimed to have detained more than 6,500 suspected 'Bangladeshi citizens', and thousands were paraded through the streets, but it was later declared that only 450 of them were found to be illegal. Last week, Bangladesh's border guards turned back four Muslim men picked up by police in Mumbai and deported, after it was found they were Indian migrant workers from the state of West Bengal.
Maj Gen Mohammad Ashrafuzzaman Siddiqui, director general of Border Guard Bangladesh, condemned India's pushback policy as 'a deviation from humane governance'.
'It contradicts international law and the dignity of the affected individuals,' said Siddiqui. 'Acts such as abandoning people in forests, forcing women and children into rivers, or dumping stateless refugees at sea are not consistent with human rights principles.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
What if the world's religions aren't competing but rather one unfolding truth?
I was born in Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when religion became the architecture of public life. But it was precisely this fusion of faith and power that forced my family to flee. We were persecuted not for breaking laws but for belonging to a minority religious community, the Bahá'ís – a persecution that continues today. This experience taught me how religion can be used to exclude, to dehumanise, to dominate. But it also taught me that ignoring religion is not the answer. More than 80% of the world's population identifies with a religion. Yet in many parts of the world – especially in the west – religion is treated as a private matter, something best kept out of polite conversation, or at worst, a source of division and danger. We live in a paradox: a deeply religious world that increasingly doesn't know how to talk about religion. This silence isn't neutral. It creates a kind of cultural illiteracy – especially at a time when religion continues to shape geopolitics, social movements and personal lives, from the rise of religious nationalism to faith-based responses to humanitarian crises. And in places like the United States, it's becoming even more central to public discourse, often with high political stakes. So how do we talk about religion in a world that needs moral clarity but fears moral language? One idea that has helped me reframe how we talk about religion comes from my own faith – the Bahá'í concept of progressive revelation. It teaches that the world's major religions are expressions of the same spiritual reality, revealed at different times to meet the evolving needs of humanity. They are not rival ideologies but chapters in a single story. Not different truths but different reflections of one truth. Imagine if we approached religion not as a set of camps to defend or oppose but as a shared inheritance. What if we stopped asking which one is right and started asking what they're trying to show us – about justice, humility, forgiveness, the soul and the sacredness of life? This shift – from debating difference to seeking shared meaning – isn't just theoretical. I've seen it work. In refugee communities in the Middle East, I witnessed how grassroots interfaith efforts helped displaced people from opposing religious backgrounds begin to heal. In one camp in Jordan, Christian and Muslim women began cooking together during Ramadan and Easter, eventually hosting communal feasts for the wider community. These weren't institutional programs but quiet acts of dignity and repair – rooted in faith and in the will to see the human behind the label. In my doctoral research on Syrian religious-minority refugees in Berlin, I found that secular integration policies often failed to account for the central role religion played in people's sense of identity, belonging and healing. Integration thrived not when religion was ignored but when it was engaged – through interfaith dialogue, shared spiritual spaces or recognition of religious holidays. These approaches didn't erase difference. They helped people move forward together. Religion became less of a dividing line and more of a connective thread. Even here, in my suburban neighbourhood in Aotearoa New Zealand, I see glimpses of this every week. On our street families come from Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Hindu, Bahá'í and other diverse backgrounds. Every Friday afternoon I host a simple class for the children of the neighbourhood. We sing, tell stories and explore themes like kindness, truthfulness and the nobility of the human spirit. It's a space for the children to discover their spiritual identity and their capacity to contribute to the world around them. Over time this has quietly knit our community together. Parents, too, have found connection – not through sameness but through a shared desire for their children to grow into just and compassionate human beings. This idea – that spiritual truth unfolds over time – has changed how I live. It's shaped how I raise my children, how I relate to neighbours of different beliefs and how I engage in public life. It helps me stay curious instead of defensive and to approach others not through fixed categories but with an openness to what we might learn from one another. And that's the heart of it, really: moral imagination – the ability to see not just what is but what could be. It invites us to ask new kinds of questions: What does it mean to live a meaningful life? How do we hold both reverence and reason in the same hand? What truths do our traditions carry that the world still needs? What happens when we stop talking about religion and start listening with it? These are not easy questions. But they matter. While secular frameworks offer many tools, they often fall short of naming the deepest yearnings of the human spirit. And while religion has been misused, it can also be reclaimed – as a source of clarity, compassion and shared purpose. Recognising the wisdom in religion doesn't mean denying the harm it's caused. It means telling the full story – separating faith from fanaticism and choosing not silence but better language: language rooted in humility, inquiry and hope. We don't need less religion in public life. We need better ways of talking about it – ways that allow both believers and non-believers to engage meaningfully, with honesty and depth. Maybe it starts with a simple shift. What if the world's religions are not competing claims but reflections of one unfolding truth? What if, beneath all our differences, there's just one story being told in many tongues? If we believed that, we might stop asking who is right –and start asking what's possible. And maybe then, we'd finally begin to build the world we all long to live in. Dr Kat Eghdamian is a human rights expert, writer and adviser on religion, ethics and social justice. With experience working across multiple continents, she explores how faith and moral frameworks shape identity and society
The Sun
32 minutes ago
- The Sun
Child murderer to SUE Parole Board for ‘breaching his human rights' after release bid rejected
A CHILD murderer is the first lifer to sue the Parole Board for breaching his human rights after his bid for freedom was rejected. Officials ruled Paul Smith — who suffocated a ten-year-old girl — should stay behind bars amid continuing concern over his twisted sexual interests. 2 But Smith, 38, has now launched a landmark High Court bid to have the decision overturned. He claims that keeping him in jail breaches his human rights in a case to run separately to a new parole appeal due this week. Smith is believed to be Britain's first child murderer to use human rights laws in a bid to be released. The trainee electrician was 17 when he murdered Rosie May Storrie at a Christmas party in 2003. She was found unconscious and half-naked on a bed in Normanton, Leics, and died two days later in hospital. Smith was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life with a minimum of 14 years' jail. At his 2004 trial, judge Mr Justice Astill said he was 'a considerable danger to young girls'. The court heard Smith, who has autism, had previously attacked a 16-year-old female friend and a 12-year-old girl. He became eligible for parole in January 2018 when his minimum jail term expired. A recommendation for open prison transfer was rejected in 2019. Parents of murdered Sarah Everard plea for more whole-life jail terms for worst offenders His appeal against conviction was rejected in 2014. The Parole Board's 2024 review concluded he was not fit to be freed due to the serious ongoing concerns about his 'sexual interests'. Smith's fresh legal challenge is being handled by specialist Newcastle firm Instalaw. It did not respond to our request for comment. Rosie May's parents, Mary and Graham, established the Rosie May Foundation in her memory to help children in crisis around the world. They did not respond to requests for a comment. 2
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Star witness against Kilmar Abrego Garcia won't be deported, court records show
Court records show that the Trump administration has agreed to spare from deportation a key witness in the federal prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia in exchange for his cooperation in the case. Jose Ramon Hernandez Reyes, 38, has been convicted of smuggling migrants and illegally reentering the United States after having been deported. He also pleaded guilty to 'deadly conduct' in connection with a separate incident where he drunkenly fired a gun in a Texas community. Records reviewed by The Washington Post show that Hernandez Reyes has been released early from federal prison to a halfway house and has been given permission to stay in the U.S. for at least a year. Prosecutors have identified Hernandez Reyes as the 'first cooperator' in the case against Abrego, according to court filings. The Department of Homeland Security maintains that Hernandez owned the SUV that Abrego Garcia was allegedly using to smuggle migrants when the Tennessee Highway Patrol stopped him in 2022. That traffic stop is at the center of the criminal investigation against Abrego Garcia. Hernandez Reyes is among a handful of cooperating witnesses who could help the administration deport Abrego Garcia. Abrego Garcia, a construction worker who had been living in Maryland, became a flashpoint over Trump's hard-line immigration policies when he was mistakenly deported to his native El Salvador in March. Facing mounting pressure and a Supreme Court order, the administration returned him this month to face the smuggling charges, which his attorneys have called 'preposterous.' On Friday, attorneys for Abrego Garcia asked a federal judge in Tennessee to delay his release from jail because of 'contradictory statements' by the administration over whether or not he'll be deported upon release. A federal judge in Nashville has been preparing to release Abrego Garcia to await trial on human smuggling charges. But she's been holding off over concerns that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would swiftly detain him and try to deport him again. Abrego Garcia's attorneys are now asking the judge to continue to detain him following statements by administration officials 'because we cannot put any faith in any representation made on this issue by' the Justice Department. Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty.
