The colossal exodus of various races in Europe during Second World War and their systematic extermination has led to worldwide concerns for the human rights of such Refugees. This has forced lawmakers to develop new principles in Jurisprudence. India is one such country which has been greatly affected by both the types of migrations; Internal and External. Former is widespread in the North-Eastern region of country mainly due to tribal conflict whereas latter extends to India acting as host for large number of refugees chiefly from Tibet (China), Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and so on. But, ironically, Indian government has till date not ratified UN Convention on Status of Refugees and yet applies its colonial era law; Foreigners Act, 1946. Also this government has not accorded refugee status to the people from PoK. Recently, the Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that a certain group of Tibetans born in India to be given citizenship. Bangladeshi refugees have also spread throughout and it has become difficult to keep tab of them, thus affecting internal stability of country, particularly in Assam which has recently led to series of violent clashes and movements there. Above mentioned are few instances alongwith some other aspects which the paper shall attempt to analyze. The Positivist law shall be analyzed based upon decided case laws and jurisprudential aspects and an attempt shall be made to apply Hart-fuller debate in High Court's decision on Tibetan matter and possible consequences. Also it shall try to investigate reasons as to why Government refuses to implement UN convention despite many calls for it and how do these all have affected Human Rights of Refugees.
Refugee, Jurisprudence, Positive Law
