The Meaning of ‘Life’ under the Indian Constitution figure on the number of stateless persons in India. 62 Some of the stateless populations in India are the Chakmas and Hajongs, Hindus from Pakistan, inhabitants of the Indian enclaves in Bangladesh, Rohingyas, persons of Chinese origin in Kolkata, Nepalis, Bihari Muslims from Bangladesh and the Sri Lankan Estate Tamils. 63 This Part will elaborate some of the problems these populations face in India on account of their statelessness to illustrate how ‘life’ is affected in a situation of statelessness. There are an estimated 40,000 Rohingyas in India. 64 Reports indicate that they face surveillance and harassment from the police as well as from the locals, that they live in makeshift structures in jhuggis and engage in rag-picking as a livelihood. 65 They do not possess identification documents as they are not recognised as nationals by Myanmar and do not receive documents in India, which limits access to health and education. 66 They face arrest, detention and a risk of deportation. 67 These are related to their statelessness as they are considered foreigners in India while Myanmar does not recognise them as citizens. The Chakmas and Hajongs are from the Chittagong Hill Tract who fled to India from East Pakistan (Bangladesh) in 1964–65. This was because of persecution as they were non-Muslim, non-Bengali speakers and because they lost their land due to the construction of a dam. 68 The Supreme Court of India noted some of the problems faced by the Chakmas in National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) v State of Arunachal Pradesh, a case where a writ petition was filed by the National Human Rights Commission on account of the persecution faced by the Chakmas from the locals, another consequence of statelessness. The All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (‘AAPSU’) had issued notices to the Chakmas to leave the state failing which force would be used against them. The Court noted that AAPSU had prevented the supply of essential facilities to the camps of the Chakmas which led to deaths and the spread of diseases. The Court recognised there was a threat to life and liberty of the Chakmas under art 21 of the Constitution and that without citizenship, they had been subjected to threats of expulsion and had been unable to access basic necessities. The Supreme Court ordered the state to ensure the protection of the life and liberty of the Chakmas and to consider their citizenship applications. 69 The Estate Tamils of Sri Lanka moved to India after Sri Lanka’s independence as their citizenship was not recognised in Sri Lanka. In India, a number of them 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 ibid. The World’s Stateless (Report, Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion December 2014) <https://files.institutesi.org/worldsstateless.pdf>. Snehal Dote, Rohingyas in India: State of Rohingya Muslims in India in Absence of Refugee Law (Report, The London Story 2020). <https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Religion/IslamophobiaAntiMuslim/Civil%20Society%20or%20Individuals/RitumbraM1.pdf>. Ashley Starr Kinseth, ‘India’s Rohingya Shame’, Al Jazeera (online, 29 January 2019) <https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/1/29/indias-rohingya-shame>. Yermi Brenner, Rohingya Migration to India: Patterns, Drivers and Experiences (Report, Mixed Migration Centre April 2019) <https://mixedmigration.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/04/063_briefing-paper_Rohingya_India.pdf>. ibid. ‘Who Are Chakmas?’, The Hindu (online, 14 September 2017) <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/who-are-chakmas/article19682129.ece>. National Human Rights Commission v State of Arunachal Pradesh and Others MANU/SC/1047/1996 (Supreme Court of India) (‘NHRC’). 195