An RTI query seeking year-wise and nationality-wise data on “infiltrators” identified, apprehended and deported over the past decade has drawn a response from the Ministry of Home Affairs stating that it does not maintain any centrally available data on such cases, and the reply has undercut repeated election claims by Union Home Minister Amit Shah that millions of infiltrators have entered the country during the Congress era.
The information was sought by RTI activist Kanhaiya Kumar and shared with The Wire Hindi, and in its response dated January 23, 2026, the ministry clarified that powers to detect, restrict movement and deport illegal foreign nationals or immigrants had been delegated under provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 to all state governments and Union Territory administrations, and therefore no consolidated data was held at the central level.
The reply assumes significance because Shah, while addressing election rallies in Assam, had alleged that seven districts were “occupied by 6.4 million infiltrators”, and he had blamed two decades of Congress rule for what he described as large-scale demographic change, while asserting that only the BJP could halt the process.
At the Narendra Mohan Memorial Lecture organised by Dainik Jagran on October 10, 2025, Shah had further claimed that the growth of the Muslim population in India was not due to fertility rates but because of extensive infiltration, and he has repeatedly portrayed illegal infiltration as a grave threat to national security and demographic balance.
However, the ministry’s admission that it lacks official, centralised figures on identification, arrests or deportations has raised questions about how such large numbers are being cited in political speeches, and critics have argued that the absence of verified data undermines the credibility of the claims.
Social activist and author Harsh Mander described the ministry’s position as highly unusual, and he contended that while states may collect data on offences, central agencies routinely consolidate and publish statistics, as is done by the National Crime Records Bureau in criminal matters, and therefore the argument that no central data exists appears unconvincing.
Mander also questioned the legal usage of the term “infiltrator”, and he pointed out that Indian law does not clearly define it, while noting that India has not signed the Refugee Convention and that, in legal terms, a person is either a citizen or a foreign national, who may be documented or undocumented, but the label “infiltrator” implies malicious intent rather than mere irregular migration.
Referring to amendments in citizenship law since 2008, he argued that the burden of proof in citizenship matters has effectively shifted to individuals, and he warned that when citizenship itself is rendered uncertain, as political philosopher Hannah Arendt had observed in describing citizenship as the “right to have rights”, the stability of all other rights is jeopardised, while he alleged that the rhetoric surrounding infiltration has placed a particular community under prolonged scrutiny and fear.