Can Sheikh Hasina Remain in India? Jaishankar’s Remark Fuels Debate Amid Extradition Demands

The question of how long former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina can remain in India has shifted from a matter of temporary refuge to a complex geopolitical dilemma. After her government collapsed during the massive student-led uprising in mid-2024, Hasina fled to India under emergency circumstances. Since then, her presence has become a sensitive issue involving legal, diplomatic, and humanitarian considerations. Recent comments by India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar at HTLS 2025 have only intensified the debate.

EAM S Jaishankar | File Image | News18

Why Sheikh Hasina Took Shelter in India

Sheikh Hasina arrived in India in August 2024 after weeks of violent protests across Bangladesh, where her government was accused of using excessive force against students demanding reforms. The unrest grew into one of the largest mass protests in the country’s history, eventually ending her two-decade influence in Bangladeshi politics. A tribunal in Dhaka later charged her with crimes against humanity, alleging she orchestrated a “systematic attack” on protesters using lethal force, drones, and paramilitary units.

In November 2025, Hasina was convicted in absentia and sentenced to death, making her one of the few democratically elected leaders in South Asia to face capital punishment after leaving office. Rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch, expressed concern over the fairness of the trial, questioning the decision to convict her in her absence and urging Bangladesh to ensure international standards of justice.

India’s Official Position and Jaishankar’s Remarks

At the HT Leadership Summit 2025, S. Jaishankar was asked directly whether Sheikh Hasina could stay in India indefinitely. His response suggested that the matter cannot be reduced to a simple yes-or-no answer. He stated that Hasina came to India due to “certain circumstances,” and those circumstances continue to shape what happens next. The decision regarding her stay, he emphasised, is ultimately for Hasina herself to make.

Other Indian officials have described the issue as a legal and diplomatic matter that requires careful evaluation. India has not accepted Bangladesh’s extradition requests so far, signalling that New Delhi is unwilling to take a position that could compromise either humanitarian considerations or its bilateral relationship with Dhaka.

Bangladesh’s Pressure for Extradition

Bangladesh’s interim government has repeatedly demanded Hasina’s extradition, citing its bilateral extradition treaty with India. Dhaka argues that India is “obliged” to hand over the former prime minister so she can serve her sentence. Bangladeshi officials view India’s hesitation as unfriendly and politically problematic.

Over the past year, formal and informal requests for extradition have been sent to New Delhi. Each time, Indian authorities have maintained that Hasina’s presence in the country is a matter tied to her personal circumstances and legal complexities. This has resulted in a diplomatic stalemate, with neither side willing to escalate tensions but neither achieving resolution.

International and Legal Concerns

Hasina’s sentence has drawn widespread international attention. Critics argue that the proceedings lacked transparency and that convicting a former head of government in absentia undermines the legitimacy of the judgment. Human rights advocates have warned that the case risks turning into political retribution rather than a neutral legal investigation.

At the same time, testimonies and reports from the 2024 crackdown document significant violence. Estimates suggest that between 800 and more than 1,000 people were killed during the protests. The tribunal has insisted that Hasina acted as the command authority behind the use of lethal force. Her legal team, however, rejects all accusations and maintains that the charges are fabricated by political rivals seeking revenge.

The Road Ahead

The future remains uncertain. Sheikh Hasina’s stay in India sits at the intersection of domestic politics in Bangladesh, regional diplomacy, and international human rights scrutiny. India must navigate the situation carefully, balancing humanitarian responsibility with political realities. Bangladesh, on the other hand, appears determined to conclude its legal process, even as concerns mount over judicial fairness.

As long as both countries remain firm on their positions, the impasse is likely to continue. Hasina’s decision regarding her next steps — whether to seek asylum elsewhere, challenge the verdict internationally, or remain in India — will define the next chapter of this unfolding regional drama.

The MGMM Outlook

Sheikh Hasina’s continued stay in India reflects a moment where humanitarian responsibility and regional politics collide. What began as an emergency refuge after the 2024 student uprising in Bangladesh has now evolved into a complex diplomatic dilemma. Her conviction and death sentence in absentia cast serious doubts on the fairness of Bangladesh’s judicial process, especially as global rights groups question the transparency of the trial. India’s cautious stance — reinforced by S. Jaishankar’s remarks that her presence is shaped by “specific circumstances” — shows New Delhi’s unwillingness to reduce the issue to a legal formality. Instead, India appears to be navigating a delicate balance: acknowledging Bangladesh’s internal political turmoil while ensuring that no action compromises humanitarian considerations or regional stability.

At the same time, Bangladesh’s interim government continues to push aggressively for her extradition, framing it as a treaty obligation rather than a political decision. This pressure, however, ignores the broader concerns surrounding due process, the legitimacy of a trial conducted in her absence, and the heavy-handed violence of the 2024 crackdown — a tragedy still debated internationally. In our view, the situation exposes the deeper fault lines in South Asia’s political landscape, where legal decisions are often inseparable from political motivations. Until Dhaka restores faith in its judicial processes and India finds a pathway that upholds both diplomacy and ethics, Sheikh Hasina’s presence will remain a symbol of the region’s unresolved tensions and its struggle to uphold justice without political interference.

(Sources: Hindustan Times, Economic Times, News18)