The concept of refugee[1] so far as India is concerned emanates from the concept of Partition which took place in the year 1947. It was finally in the month of August 1947, around 200 years after which the British Raj finally left India. The entire event of the 'Partition of India' led to significant changes in the structure of Indian political borders and the dissection of assets which was all a consequence of the dissolution of British rule in the Indian subcontinent. However, the subcontinent was partitioned into two major and independent nations.

On the one hand, was the Hindu majority-driven India, and on the other was the Muslim majority-driven Pakistan[2] (at that time comprising both West and East Pakistan), which is now officially recognized being referred to as the 'Islamic Republic of Pakistan' together with the People's Republic of Bangladesh. It is envisaged that the event of partition has been significantly embedded into the Indian Independence Act, 1947 itself. Immediately, there began a mass number of religious migrations, referred to as the longest and largest migrations in Indian history. Around an estimated million Muslims had travelled in both directions in West as well as towards East Pakistan.

As well as an estimated millions of both the Hindu as well as the Sikh communities travelled back to Indian soil. The inherent change in political borders was eventually settled in the form of a permanent division of two independent provinces of British India, majorly recognized as Bengal and Punjab. Prima facie in these two border regions, particularly Punjab and Bengal, the effects of violence seemed more 'brutal' than any other. Whereas, in the case of the majority-driven districts, they were bestowed to Pakistan and non-majority to India.

Resettlement of Refugees: (1947-1951)

Resettlement in India
The 1951 Census of India estimated that approximately 2% of the nation's original population were refugees. Primarily 1.3% were from West Pakistan, and about 0.7% were from East Pakistan. This demographic shift highlights the significant impact of migration on the population distribution at that time. Most of the Hindu and Sikh Punjabi refugees from West Punjab settled in Delhi and the East Punjab region, which encompasses Haryana and Himachal Pradesh.

Delhi, in particular, recorded the highest influx of refugees, even though a substantial number of Muslims had departed the city for Pakistan in 1947, whether voluntarily or under duress.[3] Many of the new refugees were accommodated in notable historical and military sites such as Purana Qila, the Red Fort, and Kingsway Camp. Kingsway Camp emerged as one of the largest refugee camps in Northern India, accommodating over 35,000 refugees at its peak, in addition to those in Kurukshetra near Panipat.[4] These temporary camps were subsequently transformed into permanent housing through a major construction initiative launched by the Indian government starting in 1948. Various programs were implemented across India to support refugees, offering education, employment opportunities, and access to loans for starting businesses.

Many refugees were resettled in both Western and Central Uttar Pradesh, while those fleeing from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) were placed in the Eastern, Central, and North-Eastern regions of India. Many found new homes in neighboring states such as West Bengal, Assam, and Tripura, with a significant number also settling in Madhya Pradesh. Additionally, a new township was created in Maharashtra specifically for Sindhi Hindu refugees.

Post-Partition Migration:

• Pakistan
  • Due to the constant practice of 'persecution' of Muslims specifically in India, even after having conducted the 1951 Census, a number of Muslim families from the Indian subcontinent sustained the continuing practice of migration throughout the entire period of 1950s and 1960s.
  • In the year 1959, the ILO (International Labor Organisation) decided to publish its annual report wherein it was specifically stated that from the time period of (1951 to 1956), a total of 6,50,000 Muslims from India were systematically relocated to West Pakistan.
  • Furthermore, it was general speculation that the overall count of Indian Muslim migration to Pakistan had witnessed a tremendous decline in the 1970s.
• India
  • Owing to the religious persecution conducted by Pakistan, a majority of Hindus were forced to flee to India. A majority of them eventually settled in the state of Rajasthan.
  • Furthermore, due to extreme conditions, around a thousand such Hindu families had to flee back to India in the year 2013, as revealed by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
  • Since India is not a signatory party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, it exercises a substantial denial of conferring refugee status or legal recognition to Pakistani Hindu migrants.
  • Overall, the migration of Hindus from East Pakistan to India continued even after the partition.
  • The 1951 Census of India documented that approximately 2.5 million refugees had arrived from East Pakistan, with 2.1 million coming from West Bengal alone.
  • The remaining refugees settled in Assam, Tripura, and other states.
• Indian Princely States
  • The Indian Princely States is a term used to denote all those princely states which were in the Indian sub-continent, that the Britishers didn't otherwise conquer in India.
  • However, they were bound by a treaty first to the East India Company and then subsequently to the British crown.
  • During that time, itself, many Indian princes were able to receive the 'protected status'.
  • However, there was one essential requirement which was otherwise needed to be fulfilled, for them to continue benefiting from such protected status. It was to make a mandatory payment also known as 'payments of tribute' and/or concessions of territory to help sustain their position from any further threat.

 

The Integration of Princely States After Independence

• The Zamindari system played an inherent part in Indian history, referring to a feudal system dealing with land ownership.
• Landlords collected taxes from peasants and kept a significant portion of the revenue.
• Between 1947 and 1952, various state governments enacted laws abolishing the zamindari system.
• Recognizing the need for reform, the Indian government initiated land reforms in 1947.
• The Indian Constitution was amended for the first time in 1951, bringing changes to Articles 19 and 31.

Princely States and Their Merger

• Around 565 princely states had a special relationship with the British Raj.
• Before independence, the British announced that these states would no longer be under their rule, making them legally independent.
• The Indian Independence Act of 1947 gave them three options: join India, join Pakistan, or remain independent.
• Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel led efforts to integrate these states into India through the 'Instrument of Accession.'
• India managed foreign affairs, defense, and communication, while states retained control over internal matters.
• The integration of over 500 princely states was a major achievement of independent India.

Post-Independence Arrangements

• Princely rulers were ensured autonomy in the newly formed Indian Republic in exchange for accession.
• They retained certain privileges, including the continuation of the 'Privy Purse.'
• In 1971, through the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the Privy Purse was abolished by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

India's Humanitarian Response: Managing the Refugee Crisis

• Following the integration of princely states, India saw an influx of Hindu refugees.
• In 1971, East Pakistan became Bangladesh, leading to another wave of refugees.
• On March 26, 1971, Pakistan launched 'Operation Searchlight,' causing a mass exodus to India.
• Refugees fled to West Bengal, Tripura, Meghalaya, and Assam.
• India upheld the principle of 'non-refoulement,' ensuring fair treatment for refugees.
• The Indian government organized large-scale repatriation efforts, one of the largest since World War II.
• By February 1972, around 9 million refugees had returned home, but 1 to 1.5 million remained in India.
• From 1972-73, India played a key role in integrating refugees back into Bangladesh.
• Despite lacking an international or domestic legal framework, India managed the refugee crisis effectively.
• India's humanitarian efforts influenced later UNHCR resolutions on refugee treatment.

 
From Asylum to Citizenship: The Evolution of Tibetan Refugee Status in India and the 2014 Directive on Indian Citizenship for Tibetan-Born Children
Back in the year 1950, at the time when China tried liberalizing Tibet and its people. To achieve the same, they started persecuting all the Tibetans and made efforts to attack their cultural beliefs and practices thereby forcing the Chinese Marxist ideology on those people. Tibetans, who duly followed Tibetan Buddhism with their spiritual leader Dalai Lama were specifically made targets.

Hence, after a failed uprising that took place against China back in 1959, two events took place within no time. Dalai Lama along with thousands of native Tibetans immediately fled to India. Most of the Tibetans fled to NEFA, now known as Arunachal Pradesh. The Indian government in no time took their concerns into consideration and granted immediate asylum to their leader.

Owing to this particular event, Tibet has been classified being one of the world's most successful refugee communities to have been integrated into the Indian Union. The Indian government has played a pivotal role in assuring them proper refuge. Tracing back the initial historical records, it was India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru who came to their instantaneous rescue. Finally, on 30th March 1959, the government of India formally granted political asylum to Dalai Lama, who was given refuge in Dharamshala.

The local Tibetans owing to their preference for 'trading', were hired in agricultural activities.

Hence, the following stances have been established:

1. Foremost Dalai Lama was provided political asylum, meaning he was ensured with the protection of asylum provided due to political persecution. However, he was still considered a foreigner in the Indian land, and as such couldn't have been conferred with such status of 'citizenship'. Asylum is more or less a temporary form of protection given to individuals who face the threat of persecution or in other words being politically persecuted in the home country.
2. However, as far as the refugees are concerned, they can be conferred with citizenship status.

Hence, as far as India is concerned, it has had no issues with these Tibetans being conferred the status of being citizens, however, they have refrained from asking the same.

In recent years there have been quite a few significant developments that have finally helped curb the consistently reducing size of the Tibetan population, particularly in the South Asia region. It was back in the year 2014 that the Election Commission of India issued a directive to all the respective states that in cases of Indian-born children of any such Tibetan refugees, they shall be eligible to acquire or in other words be conferred with such status of 'Indian citizenship', provided they are able to furnish records that they were born between 26th January, 1950 and 1st July 1987. The provided timeline is quite expansive to cover many of the Tibetan refugees. Furthermore, it has been observed that despite the number being small some sections of Tibetans have started applying for citizenship. A small fraction of others have started voting at district-level elections.
 
The Matua Community: Migration from East Pakistan, Path to Citizenship, and Current Status in West Bengal
The Matua community are the ones who are predominantly Hindus and originated from erstwhile East Pakistan. It was in the aftermath of Partition in the year 1947 that a large chunk of these people migrated into India, and continued migrating in large numbers even during the Bangladesh Liberation War, 1971. The latter movement was as a result of well-founded fear as a result of ongoing religious persecution and political unrest within the country.

Hence, there was a large influx of people coming and settling in West Bengal, especially in the northern districts including North 24 Parganas and parts of the Bonga Border and its surrounding areas. [11]
Finally, in the year 2019 came wherein the Indian government passed the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 which ensures these people with a pathway to citizenship for all non-Muslim refugees from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan who had entered India before the date specified as 31st December 2014.

Hence, many members of the community are no doubt falling being eligible to apply for Indian Citizenship under the Act.
At the grassroots level, the government has also initiated various schemes to ensure their socio-economic development thereby upholding proper standards of education, healthcare, and housing facilities.
 

Constitutional Provisions for Refugees in India

The Constitution of India, being the supreme document of the land, provides for rights and safeguards to the citizens of the country. It thereby extends such protection to non-citizens as well. Hence, where refugees are within Indian territory, they shall be equally subjected to all the rights and safeguards otherwise ensured to citizens. The most significant right enshrined in the Constitution is upheld through the exercise and enforcement of:

• Article 21 – Protects the right to life and personal liberty.
• Article 14 – Provides for equality before the law.
• Other relevant articles available to non-citizens, including refugees: Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 20, 22, 25-28, 32, and 226.

Treatment for Asylum Seekers

The three types of treatment for asylum seekers are as follows:

1. National Treatment – Asylum seekers in India receive the same treatment in terms of political and civil rights as Indian citizens. These rights include:
   • Article 14 – Right to Equality
   • Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty
2. Treatment Accorded to Foreigners – Rights given to foreigners, particularly concerning residence and movement. Examples from the Refugee Convention, 1951:
   • Article 17 – Right to Employment or Profession
   • Article 26 – Freedom of Residence and Movement
   • Article 21 – Right to Housing
   • Article 15 – Right to Form Associations
   • Article 13 – Right to Property
      
3. Special Treatment – Even though India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, it still ensures special protections for asylum seekers, upholding constitutional safeguards and treaty obligations. Humanitarian protections include:
   • Temporary shelter
   • Protection from deportation
   • Legal aid in line with International Human Rights Treaty obligations

Legal Precedent

In Louis De Raedt vs. Union of India, the court expressly stated that fundamental rights, including the right to life, liberty, and dignity, shall also apply to non-citizens.

Laws for Refugees in India

India does not have specific laws for regulating the plight of refugees. However, there is a proposed bill known as the Refugee and Asylum (Protection) Bill, 2009. The major legislation affecting the status of refugees and asylum seekers includes:

• Foreigners Act, 1946
• Citizenship Act, 1955
• Extradition Act, 1962
• Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920
• Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993

 
Role of the Judiciary for the Protection of Refugees
The judiciary has huge responsibilities in the protection of the refugee's rights and refugees often find solace in courts, often acting as the final arbiter in ensuring adherence to national and international legal standards. Courts have sought to 'remind' governments of their international legal responsibilities including the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. They have respected the principle of non-refoulement which bars any state from expelling the individual as they will be subjected to persecution or peril in the home country.

The judiciary also has a very significant role in covering the lacuna in domestic refugee law, providing recourse for asylum seekers when administrative or executive actions are found to be arbitrary or in violation of fundamental rights. By setting legal precedents, judiciaries guarantee supplemental protection; refugees are treated equally, get to exercise basic human rights, and cannot be unlawfully detained or tortured.

In a particular judgment Ktaer Abbas Habib Al Qutaifi vs UOI, the Gujrat High Court put forth the principle of 'non-refoulement'
 
Problems faced by Refugees in India
Refugees in India face a range of persistent challenges despite the country's longstanding history of hosting displaced populations. One of the major challenges is the lack of a formal legal framework for refugees since India has not ratified the 1951 UN convention on the status of refugees or the 1967 protocol. This leads to inconsistent treatment of refugees, with some groups receiving better access to rights and services while others remain vulnerable to exploitation, arbitrary detention, and deportation. Refugees are denied fundamental rights including health, education, and employment, forcing many to live under precarious living conditions.

Also, they might end up suffering from social discrimination and xenophobia, which are likely to worsen their ordeal. Refugees' protection is still an issue that remains to be fully realized as the principle of non-refoulement, as evidenced by the case of Ktaer Abbas Habib Al Qutaifi v Union of India[13] is not always complied with and refugees can still be returned to their perilous countries. The lack of legal status and formal documentation also restricts their ability to integrate fully into Indian society.
 
Challenges Faced by Rohingyas in India

1. Lack of Formal Refugee Status: From the Indian legal viewpoint, Rohingyas are not entitled to refugee status even though they are in India. India does not have a particular policy for refugees and does not recognize refugees per se and give them asylum. Rather, the Rohingyas were at the most regarded as "illegal immigrants[14]", due to their irregular entry into the country, which means they do not receive formal refugee status.
2. Absence of Legal Protections: Thus, being denied legal recognition as refugees, the Rohingyas are not protected by Indian law. They cannot claim the rights and freedom that is accorded to the refugees as per the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol of which India is neither a signatory nor has appropriate national legislation to give full effect to these treaty obligations.
3. Vulnerability and Human Rights Issues: Because Rohingyas are undocumented, they are most susceptible to arrest, detention, and deportation.[15] Some of them experience challenges in the availability and utilization of general services such as health care, education, and justice. It also leaves them vulnerable to exploitation, and at worst, discrimination since they are legally considered as illegals.
4. Security Concerns: This has raised some security concerns which sometimes makes the Indian government act inappropriately, resulting in forced relocation or deportation of Rohingyas to Myanmar. This contributes to their feeling of lack of security and general vulnerability.

Conclusion
The evolution of refugee protection in India reflects the country's complex historical and legal landscape. In the later period e.g. after the partition of India in 1947 it had to deal with massive influxes of refugees, particularly from Pakistan and later Bangladesh, as well as from Tibet. Despite the absence of a specific refugee law and non-ratification of the 1951 Refugee Convention, India has consistently provided asylum and support to displaced populations. Key initiatives included the resettlement of refugees from the 1947 Partition and the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, with extensive government efforts ensuring their temporary protection and eventual repatriation.

The integration of Tibetan refugees, particularly post-1959, highlighted India's humanitarian approach, culminating in a 2014 directive allowing Indian citizenship for Tibetan-born children. The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, further addressed the plight of the Matua community from East Pakistan.

Constitutional provisions such as Articles 14 and 21 offer fundamental protections to non-citizens, while the judiciary has upheld refugee rights through landmark rulings. Despite these measures, challenges persist, including inconsistent legal status, social discrimination, and specific issues like those faced by Rohingyas. Overall, India's response underscores a commitment to humanitarian principles amidst legal and practical complexities.

Also Read:

• Refugee Law: The Indian Penal Code Perspective
• Refugee Law: The Constitution Perspective