What We Know So Far: June 12, 2025
The Gauhati High Court on June 11 raised serious concerns over the continued detention of Hachinur @ Hasinur, a resident of Milan Nagar in Goalpara, who had been picked up by the Border Police on May 25, 2025 despite being released on bail in 2021 and allegedly complying with all bail conditions, including weekly attendance at the local police station. The Court observed that if the detenu had been appearing regularly as required, his custody may amount to illegal detention.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by Mozida Begum, mother of Hachinur, who approached the Court after her son disappeared from public view following his detention. Her petition included Annexure-4, a police-station-attested attendance sheet showing that her son had signed in at Goalpara Police Station on May 5, May 12, and May 19 — just days before he was picked up.
“If he was complying with bail, detention may be illegal”: High Court
During the hearing, Advocate A.R. Sikdar, representing the petitioner, informed the Court that he had been able to meet Hachinur in the Kokrajhar Holding Centre, where he is currently lodged. He urged the Court to consider granting bail on the ground that Hachinur had been fully complying with the conditions laid down when he was released on bail by the High Court in 2021.
The bench, comprising Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Malasri Nandi, took note of the submissions and orally observed that if the detenu had in fact been reporting to the police every week as required, then his re-detention may lack legal basis.
“But if he was not violating his bail conditions, detention may be illegal,” the bench remarked. It further directed that Annexure-4 — the attendance sheet signed by police officers — be sent to the Officer-in-Charge of Goalpara Police Station for immediate verification.
State counsel seeks time; court issues notice, demands verification
The Standing Counsel for the Foreigners Tribunal, appearing for the State, submitted that notice may be issued, and indicated that an affidavit could be filed after the facts were verified. The bench agreed to proceed formally, but underscored that the matter could not be allowed to drift, especially in light of what appeared to be documented compliance by the detainee.
Accordingly, the Court ordered the issuance of notice to the respondents, observing that notice had already been issued on June 6, but reiterating that the matter required active steps. (details of June 6 hearing may be read here.)
The Court further directed that:
- The Officer-in-Charge of Goalpara Police Station is to verify the authenticity of Annexure 4 — the attendance sheet annexed with the petition;
- A soft copy of the entire petition and Annexure 4 is to be shared by the petitioner’s counsel with the FT standing counsel, who shall forward it via email to the SP (Border), Goalpara and the Officer-in-Charge, Goalpara PS;
- The State is to file an affidavit confirming or contesting the contents of the attendance sheet by Monday (June 16);
The case is listed for next hearing on June 16, allowing the Court to hear the matter in light of the verification.
Family granted visitation rights to Kokrajhar Holding Centre
As an additional relief, the Court granted liberty to two family members to visit Hachinur at the Kokrajhar Holding Centre, ensuring that the family can maintain contact and facilitate his legal representation. This order builds on the interim protection granted on June 6, in which the Court had also directed that no deportation of the detainee be carried out without its express permission.
Background and legal framework
Hachinur was declared a foreigner by a Foreigners Tribunal prior to 2021. However, he was granted bail by the Gauhati High Court, and released on conditions set out in the Supreme Court directions concerning long-term detainees during the COVID-19 pandemic. One key condition was that he appear at the local police station weekly. The family maintains he had never missed a date, and that this was confirmed through police-signed attendance records.
Despite this, on May 25, 2025, he was taken into custody by Border Police, initially moved to the Goalpara Police Reserve, and then shifted to the Matia Transit Camp, where officials allegedly told his family he was no longer present. His location was only confirmed during the June 6 hearing, when the FT counsel revealed he was at Kokrajhar Holding Centre.
The current proceedings question whether such a re-arrest — absent any breach of bail or new judicial direction — can be sustained under law, and whether it violates Articles 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and 22 (protection against arbitrary detention) of the Constitution.
The order may be read below.
Related:
Seeking sanctuary, facing scrutiny: Why India must revisit its approach to the displaced
India: A deep dive into the legal obligations before “deportation”