CAT/C/62/D/715/2015 1993. He spent four days in detention, during which time he was tortured. The complainant was released after his father paid a bribe of Rs 50,000 and subsequently spent three days in hospital. In December 1993, the police raided his home. However, the complainant was not there and, after seeing the police, escaped and stayed in another village. On 5 February 1994, he attempted to visit his parents but had to run away because the police came to his parents’ home searching for him. The complainant then fled to the United States of America with the help of an agent and applied for asylum there. His asylum application was rejected in 2004. In order to avoid deportation from the United States, he fled to Canada with the help of an agent on 12 February 2010. 2.2 The complainant applied for asylum in Canada on 3 March 2010. His request was rejected on 7 May 2013. On 2 July 2013, he applied to the Canadian Federal Court for leave to seek judicial review of the decision. The Federal Court dismissed the complainant’s application on 9 October 2013. The affidavits from his fellow villagers and his father, which the complainant presented to substantiate his claims, were found not to have probative value. The complainant's applications for a pre-removal risk assessment and residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and his request for deferral of removal were denied in 2015. He was asked to leave the country on 8 October 2015. 2.3 The complainant informed his father that he would arrive to India on 25 November 2015. According to the complainant, his father shared this information with a few members of the local government in order to make sure the complainant was safe from the police. Informed of the complainant’s return, the police raided his home and arrested his father on 12 October 2015. His father was released on 17 October 2015 and since then he has been detained at home and prohibited from taking part in any political activities. The complaint 3.1 The complainant asserts that the State party would violate his rights under article 3 of the Convention by forcibly removing him to India, where he would be at risk of torture, cruel treatment and even the death sentence due to his alleged connections with Sikh terrorism in the State of Punjab. The complainant was twice arrested and subjected to brutal torture by officials of the Indian police, which continues to actively search for him and harass and torture his family members. He claims that the Canadian authorities erred in their assessment of the risk he would face if returned to India. The complainant maintains that, according to credible reports, India is affected by serious human rights problems, including police abuse, extrajudicial killings and torture. 2 On 15 October 2015, the police arrested the leader of the Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar/Mann) party and thousands of the party’s members during a demonstration organized by Sikhs in protest against the desecration of their holy book in the village of Bargari. The Indian police may suspect Sikhs living abroad of instigating the protests. State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits 4.1 In a note verbale dated 6 March 2016, the State party requests the Committee to lift the interim measures. It submits that the complainant has not established that he would be at risk of irreparable harm if removed to India and that his claims have been thoroughly assessed by the domestic authorities. Even if his allegations were accepted as true, based on objective country reports, he could avail himself of an internal flight alternative, since his political profile is not likely to make him of interest to the central authorities in India. 4.2 The State party indicates that the complainant’s application for asylum was denied by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. The Board concluded that his allegations were not credible. It did not find it reasonable to believe that the Indian police considered him to be a person of interest; that they were seeking him; that they would be interested in the complainant, but not in his father, who was as well politically active in the Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar/Mann) party; that the 2 2 leather belts and rods; forced to lie on a large block of ice; hung upside down by a rope attached to the ceiling, etc. See the United States, Department of State, “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2012: India” and “International Religious Freedom Report for 2012: India”.

Select target paragraph3