CAT/C/62/D/695/2015
found next to a highway and brought to a hospital, but had passed away. 2 The family went
to the hospital, but the police did not hand over the body to the family so it could be
cremated according to Sikh religion and rites and did not allow an autopsy to be performed.
Against that background, the family believed that the uncle had been tortured and killed by
the police.
2.7
On 4 December 2014, the Refugee Protection Division rejected the complainant’s
application for asylum, having found that his accounts had not been credible and that he
had an internal flight alternative. It found, inter alia, that it was not credible that the police
would have released the father after paying a small bribe if they had suspected him of being
involved in terrorist activities including explosives. Likewise, it found implausible that, if
the police had been looking for the complainant for suspected militant activities, he would
have been able to pass through the security checks at Delhi airport using his own passport.
The Division also stated that, during the proceedings, the complainant had given four
different versions of what the police had told his father on his father’s initial release on 9
June 2009 regarding the truck. Likewise, in his application for asylum, the complainant had
stated that, on 24 December 2009, the police had accused him and his family of working for
Sikh and Muslim militants, but had maintained that the police had asked him about his
father’s whereabouts and where the explosives were. Finally, the Division stated that, when
interrogated about the medical certificate dated 16 September 2014 and about what exact
treatment the doctor had performed, the complainant had repeated what was mentioned in
the certificate and had not mentioned that any X-rays had been performed. When he later
acknowledged that X-rays had been performed, he could not explain why he had omitted to
mention that in his application and why it was not reflected in the medical certificate.
Against that background, the Division gave the medical certificate “no probative value”.
2.8
The complainant applied to the Federal Court of Canada to submit an appeal against
the judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division, but his request was
rejected on 18 March 2015.
2.9
The complainant submits that, on 4 June 2015, plainclothes police officers arrested
his mother and accused the complainant of being behind a Sikh protest that had taken place
in Jammu that day, and that he and other Sikhs had financed the protest from Canada. He
also submits that his mother was detained and tortured for four days, and released after
paying a bribe of 100,000 rupees on condition that she make the complainant return to India
and surrender to the police.
2.10 On 2 August 2015, the complainant applied to the Canada Boarder Services Agency
to have his removal deferred. That application was under consideration at the time the
present complaint was submitted to the Committee. The complainant maintains that he had
informed relatives and friends in India about his deportation, that someone had passed that
information on to the police and that police officers had come to his village and announced
that they knew he was about to be deported.
2.11 The complainant alleges that, with the decision of the Federal Court of 18 March
2015, he has exhausted all domestic remedies and there is no other remedy available to him
in the State party. Notably, at the time his complaint was submitted to the Committee, he
could not apply for a pre-removal risk assessment, since failed asylum seekers cannot by
law apply for such an assessment within one year of a refused refugee application.
The complaint
3.
The complainant claims that, by deporting him to India, the State party would
violate article 3 of the Convention, as he would be at risk of being subjected to torture or
other cruel treatment or punishment. The State party authorities arbitrarily dismissed his
asylum request without giving due consideration to the documentation submitted in support
of his allegations.
2
The complaint provides a copy of a death certificate that indicates that G.S. died on 3 March 2013 and
had been brought dead to the hospital at 3.15 a.m.
3