Continued Detention of Non-Accused Individuals Without Investigation Violates Article 21: Kerala High Court

In a significant ruling protecting the fundamental right to liberty, the High Court of Kerala has ordered the immediate repatriation of two Sri Lankan children who had been held in a transit home for over two years. The Court found that their continued detention, despite not being accused of any criminal offense, was an unconstitutional deprivation of their rights.

The Backdrop of a Two-Year Limbo

The petitioners, citizens of Sri Lanka, were taken into custody alongside their parents following the parents' arrest by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in connection with two separate criminal cases. Since their detention, the children have been housed at the Gandhibhavan International Trust in Pathanapuram, Kollam—a facility functioning as a transit home.

Although the children held valid Sri Lankan passports, their Indian visas had expired in October 2022. Following a previous order in a bail application (BA No. 7981 of 2022), they remained at the transit home under judicial directive. However, with no active investigation pending against them, their continued confinement sparked a constitutional crisis.

Arguments for Liberty

Counsel for the petitioners argued that the continued detention of minors who are not involved in any criminal investigation is a clear violation of their constitutional guarantees. They sought immediate facilitation for their return to Sri Lanka, including the issuance of necessary travel documentation and exit permits.

The Respondents, represented by the Deputy Solicitor General of India, clarified that the NIA no longer requires the children for any inquiry or investigation. The state maintained that it had no objection to their repatriation, provided they were no longer needed by any investigative agency.

Court’s Reasoning

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas emphasized that the state’s continued retention of individuals who pose no threat to an investigation is unsustainable under Indian law. The Court focused on the core principle of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Bench noted that the lack of active legal grounds for detention rendered the children's situation untenable. By keeping them in a transit home indefinitely, the state was effectively infringing upon their basic right to life and liberty.

Key Observations

• On Liberty: "The continued detention of the petitioners in India will amount to a deprivation of the right to life and liberty of the petitioners."
• On State Action: "The 1st respondent must initiate necessary steps to issue an exit permit and other travel documents at the earliest to enable their return to Sri Lanka."
• On Compliance: "The 1st respondent shall ensure that petitioners exit the country at the earliest and if any hurdle is caused, the same shall be overcome at the earliest using the good offices of the 1st respondent."

The Road Home

The High Court has allowed the writ petition and issued a time-bound directive. The Foreigners Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) is now mandated to facilitate the return of the petitioners to Sri Lanka by issuing all required travel and exit permits. The Court strictly stipulated that this process must be completed no later than two weeks from the date of the application.

This judgment serves as a vital reminder that administrative mechanisms, such as transit homes, cannot be used to indefinitely confine individuals who are not subjects of criminal proceeding, reinforcing the judiciary's role as the guardian of fundamental human rights.