New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear on Monday RJD‘s request for a week’s extension of the Sept 1 deadline for people in Bihar to submit their claims and objections to the draft voter list prepared by the Election Commission after special intensive revision (SIR).Appearing for RJD, advocate Prashant Bhushan told a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi that a large number of applications seeking inclusion of names in the voter list is streaming in and pleaded that it would be prudent for the EC to extend the Sept 1 deadline by a week to enable every person left out of the voter list to take corrective measures.The bench asked Bhushan as to why RJD is not making such a request to EC. “If the EC finds the request genuine and backed by facts, it will surely extend it,” the bench said. But Bhushan persisted with the request for an urgent hearing to which the bench acceded and posted the applications for hearing on Monday.Appearing for some other applicants, senior advocates Shoeb Alam and Shadan Farasat told the bench that prior to the Aug 22 order of the SC impleading all 12 recognised political parties in Bihar in the proceedings, as many as 80,000 claims and objections were filed. Since Aug 22, nearly 95,000 more such applications have been filed, which is indicative of more people finding discrepancies in the draft voter list.Some states promoting illegal migration, says SGFor the West Bengal govt’s migrant workers’ welfare board, advocate Prashant Bhushan told SC, “They (migrants) are caught in a crossfire. This is per se illegal and violative of the right to life.”The bench said, “Security forces have a right to repulse illegal migrants. Only if the person is on Indian soil that the procedure is to be followed…We will request the Centre to clarify its stand whether speaking Bengali language is a ground for deportation. Is there a bias among officials to treat persons speaking a certain language as foreigners?” Solicitor general Tushar Mehta said, “Obviously speaking Bengali is not a ground for deportation.”“However, India cannot be the world’s capital for illegal migrants. Why is no individual petitioning SC? Why organisations are coming forward. There are states which are promoting illegal migrants to come in and settle in India. It is very disturbing that a systematic racket is going on to facilitate illegal migrants to enter a border state,” he said and drew the court’s attention to massive problems faced by European countries because of the influx of illegal migrants.The bench agreed that illegal migrants are a problem and said, “They pose threat to the nation’s security, integrity and demography as well as a strain on its resources. It is a serious international issue and very complicated too. However, In West Bengal and Punjab, the people on either side of the border speak the same language and share culture. So, language alone could not be the tool to identify foreigners.”The bench said, “Pushing back illegal migrants is not an issue. But those whom you are deporting, you must ask for their identity proof.” Mehta said those affected by deportation should complain to the court and they could be provided with legal aid to present their case. “Illegal migrants are facing serious problems in the US. Bhushan should go there to assist them,” he snidely remarked.Referring to reports of a wall built at the US-Mexico border, the bench asked, “Are you going to build a wall at the border like America?” Mehta said India is fencing the border with Bangladesh and the matter was supervised by SC itself to stop illegal immigration.The apex court bench said the border with Bangladesh in the states of Assam, Tripura, West Bengal and other northeastern states is very porous and there is a large influx of illegal migrants.Decide on Sonali Bibi’s habeas corpus plea at earliest, HC toldAdvocate Prashant Bhushan Friday informed Supreme Court that a pregnant Sonali Bibi was pushed into Bangladesh by Indian authorities and she was arrested by Bangladesh police as an illegal Indian migrant and yet Calcutta HC adjourned hearing on an habeas corpus petition for her repatriation on the ground that a similar matter is pending before the SC.A bench led by Justice Surya Kant said matters relating to liberty cannot be adjourned and must be decided expeditiously. It requested the Calcutta HC to take up the matter on its own merit and pass appropriate orders. It allowed the relatives of the pregnant woman to raise their grievances before HC.Bhushan said there was no inquiry conducted prior to pushing her into Bangladesh. SC said, “The solicitor general is right in saying it may be a singular case of aberration for which habeas corpus petition is pending before the HC.”