Washington, Jan 13 (NationPress) In a groundbreaking ruling, a US federal court has mandated immigration officials to ensure the return of an Indian citizen who was deported to India, despite an explicit court directive prohibiting his removal. The judge determined that the deportation was illegal and represented a clear breach of judicial authority.

In a memorandum issued on January 9, the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas stated that Francisco D’Costa was forcibly removed from the United States on December 20, 2025, “over three hours after the court order preventing his removal” had been issued.

The court highlighted that it had assumed jurisdiction over D’Costa’s habeas petition earlier that morning, ordering that the government “SHALL NOT remove or deport Petitioner from the United States” without prior court approval.

Despite this directive, the court noted that D’Costa was boarded onto a Turkish Airlines flight that took off from Houston at 2:55 p.m. that same day. According to a memorandum from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the US Attorney’s Office, ICE officials, and the detention center were aware of the stay before the flight’s departure.

“The motivations behind Petitioner’s unlawful removal—relevant to contempt—do not affect the legality of the removal,” the court stated, dismissing the government's claim that the deportation was accidental.

D’Costa, originally from India and residing in the United States since 2009, was permitted voluntary departure by an immigration judge in October 2025. After securing legal representation, he submitted a motion to reopen his case, citing deteriorating conditions in India and a potential risk of persecution due to his conversion to Christianity, as documented in court records.

The submission of this motion automatically transformed his voluntary departure into a final removal order under federal regulations. The immigration judge denied a stay request but had not yet ruled on the motion to reopen at the time of D’Costa’s expulsion, according to the court.

The court emphasized that the removal at that point jeopardized D’Costa’s statutory right to file a motion to reopen, raising significant due process issues.

However, the government contended that facilitating D’Costa’s return was unnecessary, asserting that the court lacked jurisdiction and that D’Costa could pursue further actions from abroad. The court dismissed these claims, asserting that his return was essential to ensure the case is managed “as it would have been had he not been improperly removed.”

Citing a unanimous Supreme Court decision, the court affirmed that facilitating a return to the United States is a suitable remedy when a noncitizen is unlawfully removed in breach of a court order.

The court has ordered the government to arrange D’Costa’s return “as soon as possible” and instructed authorities to submit, within five days, a plan detailing the steps they will take to achieve this.

At this point, the court has denied D’Costa’s plea for contempt findings and financial penalties without prejudice, allowing those matters to be addressed later if required, as stated in the order.