(JEJU ISLAND, SOUTH KOREA) — Indian influencer Sachin Awasthi said South Korean officials detained him and his wife, Deepshikha Mishra, for 38 hours on Jeju Island and during transit in China after denying them entry and citing “unclear travel intentions.”
Awasthi, a content creator known for lifestyle and travel videos on Instagram and YouTube, described arriving on Jeju Island excited for a vacation before officials escorted the couple to a holding area within hours.
Officials cited “unclear travel intentions” despite his offers to show past travel history and documents, he said.
Awasthi said the detention space felt “treated like criminals,” and he later described a facility he characterized as jail-like, with no sunlight and limited “jail food.”
The incident drew wider attention after Awasthi shared his account in a widely circulated Instagram post and YouTube video from late December 2025, prompting debate among Indian travelers about entry to visa-free destinations.
Jeju Island operates a visa-waiver program that allows direct entry without a mainland South Korean visa if arriving internationally and not proceeding to the mainland, according to a travel advisory the Embassy of India in Seoul issued on February 24, 2026.
That advisory urged Indian nationals to exercise caution with the program and emphasized preparation to avoid denial of entry under international aviation rules holding airlines responsible for deportees.
Awasthi said he and Mishra faced restricted communication during detention on Jeju Island and alleged they received little food, while restroom visits took place under monitoring.
He alleged racial discrimination by South Korean officials and said airline staff harassed them, describing an experience he presented as humiliating and tightly controlled.
His account extended beyond Jeju Island to a transit stop in China, where Awasthi reported continued supervision and said he faced phone restrictions.
During that transit, he said, food and water were scarce and police monitored restroom visits.
Awasthi said the couple felt pressured during the return process, describing a scramble to comply with directions while facing limits on communication and movement.
He said they booked return flights at nearly 10 times the normal price.
Awasthi also said they signed forms—allegedly under duress—stating they received proper accommodation and food.
After returning to India, he described the experience as mentally exhausting.
Awasthi framed his account as a warning about the gap between travel content and the realities some travelers face at borders, rather than a plea for sympathy.
“Immigration decisions are their authority. But they did not have any right to treat us like criminals,” said Awasthi.
He described trying to address questions by offering to show his travel history and documents, but said officials still pointed to “unclear travel intentions” as the basis for their actions.
The Embassy of India in Seoul issued its February 24, 2026 advisory after Awasthi’s story spread online, linking the public discussion to practical risks for Indian travelers using Jeju Island’s visa-waiver pathway.
The advisory focused on preparation for entry and the possibility that travelers could face denial under rules that place responsibility on airlines in deportation situations.
Awasthi’s account also fueled online arguments over whether the episode reflected the power of a passport or the conduct of immigration officers and airlines.
Social media reactions debated weak passports versus poor treatment by Jeju and Chinese immigration and airlines, and the arguments widened into a visa debate among Indian travelers considering visa-free zones like Jeju.
Awasthi’s case circulated as an example that even travelers who believe they carry sufficient documentation and a history of international trips can still face detention or removal if authorities question their purpose.
In his telling, the issue began soon after arrival, when he said officials separated the couple’s trip from its “dream vacation” expectations and moved them into a controlled holding environment.
He said the facility offered no sunlight and little privacy, and he described meals as limited “jail food.”
His account of restricted communication included limits on contacting others while he and Mishra remained under supervision.
Awasthi’s allegations of racial discrimination centered on the way he said officials treated them while they were held and questioned.
He also accused an airline of harassment during the process that ended with the couple leaving the region, though he did not present his account as a dispute over South Korea’s right to decide entry.
Instead, he focused on the manner of detention and the conditions he said they endured across two jurisdictions and a transit route.
The China transit leg, as Awasthi described it, repeated the patterns he said began on Jeju Island: supervision, limited access to a phone, and controlled restroom breaks.
He said the couple had little food and water and felt they had no meaningful ability to resist demands tied to onward travel.
Awasthi said the pressure to arrange return flights came with steep costs, and he described paying nearly 10 times the normal price as part of what he portrayed as a coerced, fast-moving departure.
His claim that they signed forms under duress added to the sense, in his account, that paperwork served more to protect institutions than reflect what he says occurred.
The Embassy of India’s advisory did not address the specifics of Awasthi’s detention conditions, but it cautioned Indian nationals about how the Jeju Island visa-waiver program works and urged travelers to prepare to avoid being denied entry.
The advisory also emphasized international aviation rules holding airlines responsible for deportees, a point that highlighted airlines’ role in return logistics and the stakes for carriers transporting people who later face denial at the border.
Awasthi’s online posts drew attention because he built his public presence on travel and lifestyle content, turning his detention account into a widely shared narrative among Indian travelers watching for warnings about entry screening.
The episode also sharpened debate on social media over whether visa-free access creates a false sense of certainty about being allowed to enter a destination.
The central phrase Awasthi said officials used—“unclear travel intentions”—became a focal point of that debate, as commenters argued over how much discretion border agencies exercise even when travelers believe their plans are straightforward.
Awasthi said he offered to show past travel history and documents, but he still faced detention and denial, an experience that fed online warnings that documentation alone may not prevent problems if authorities remain unconvinced.
In the discussion that followed, some users framed the story as an issue of passport strength, while others focused on what they described as poor treatment by Jeju and Chinese immigration officials and by airlines.
The arguments spilled into a broader visa debate, with Jeju Island often cited because its visa-waiver program can appear, to some travelers, to simplify travel planning while still involving scrutiny at arrival.
Awasthi’s account also placed the airline experience under a harsh light, with his allegations of harassment and pressure to pay for costly return tickets adding to calls online for more transparency around removals and transit handling.
His story described an arc from excitement to confinement, then to a supervised transit and an expensive return, leaving him to present the experience as a lesson in how quickly travel plans can unravel.
No official response from South Korean or Chinese authorities explains the denial beyond unclear intentions.
Sachin Awasthi’s Jeju Island Trip Turns Nightmare as Travel Intentions Stay Unclear
Indian influencer Sachin Awasthi reported a harrowing 38-hour detention after being denied entry to Jeju Island, South Korea. Cited for ‘unclear travel intentions,’ Awasthi and his wife faced restrictive conditions in both Jeju and China. The incident sparked a massive online debate regarding passport strength and traveler treatment, leading the Indian Embassy to warn citizens about the complexities of visa-free entry programs.
