The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly questioned the legal status of Rohingyas living in India and asked whether the country should give a warm welcome to people it described as "intruders" while many Indian citizens continue to struggle with poverty.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made these sharp remarks while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by rights activist Rita Manchanda who said that a few Rohingyas had gone missing from the custody of authorities.

The hearing in the case has now been moved to December 16.

Her counsel said that some Rohingyas were taken away by the Delhi Police in May and no one had any information about where they were kept.

The CJI asked, "If they do not have legal status to stay in India, and you are an intruder, we have a very sensitive border in the north India side. If an intruder comes, do we give them a red carpet welcome saying we would like to give you all facilities" and added, "What is the problem in sending them back."

He said that India is already a country with many poor people and the focus should be on helping them.

The CJI said, "First you enter, you cross the border illegally. You dug a tunnel or crossed the fence and entered India illegally. Then you say, now that I have entered, your laws must apply to me and say, I am entitled to food, I am entitled to shelter, my children are entitled to education. Do we want to stretch the law like this."

The petitioner pointed to a 2020 Supreme Court order that said Rohingyas must be deported only through proper procedure.

The CJI then said, "We also have poor people in the country. They are citizens. Are they not entitled to certain benefits and amenities? Why not concentrate on them? It is true, even if somebody has entered illegally, we should not subject them to third degree methods...You are asking writ of habeas to bring them back."

The bench also said that any plan to send them back could create "logistical issues".

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, said that the plea was not filed by someone directly affected and the petitioner did not have the right to file it.

On July 31, during a hearing on a group of pleas connected to the status of Rohingyas in India, the top court had said that the main question in such cases is whether they are refugees or illegal entrants.

The court said that once that question is answered, the next issues will naturally follow.

Justice Kant observed, "The first major issue is simple, are they refugees or illegal entrants."

The bench listed the broader questions it needs to consider in the Rohingya cases.

It asked, "Whether the Rohingyas are entitled to be declared as refugees? If so, what protections, privileges or rights are they entitled to."

It said the next question is whether the Centre and the states were justified in deporting them if they are not refugees and are instead illegal entrants.

It also asked, "Even if the Rohingyas have been held to be illegal entrants, can they be detained indefinitely or they are entitled to be released on bail, subject to such conditions as the court may deem fit to be imposed."

The court said that another question in the petitions is about Rohingyas living in camps and whether they are getting basic facilities like drinking water, sanitation and education.

The bench also asked, "If the Rohingyas are illegal entrants, whether the government of India and the states are obligated to deport them in accordance with law."

The court placed the different petitions into three groups, one related to Rohingyas, one not connected to them and one that deals with another issue.

It said each group would be heard separately and hearings will be held on consecutive Wednesdays.

The bench also said that in cases where people are found to be illegal entrants and where the question is about the duty of the State to deport them, the court can only set the guiding principles.

On May 16, the Supreme Court criticised some petitioners who claimed that 43 Rohingya refugees including women and children were taken to the Andaman sea to be sent to Myanmar and said, "when the country is passing through a difficult time, you come out with fanciful ideas".

The court questioned the truth of the material presented by petitioner Mohammad Ismail and others and refused to stop further deportation of Rohingyas because the court had already rejected this request earlier.

On May 8, the top court had said that if the Rohingya refugees in India are found to be foreigners under the law, they will have to be deported.

The court also said that its earlier orders made it clear that identity cards issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees will not help them under Indian law.