UI2024002387

Pursuant to Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, I make an anonymity order. Unless the Upper Tribunal or a Court directs otherwise, no report of these proceedings or any form of publication thereof shall directly or indirectly identify the Appellant or members of his family. This direction applies to, amongst others, all parties. Any failure to comply with this direction could give rise to contempt of court proceedings. I make this order because the Appellant seeks international protection and is therefore entitled to privacy.

             This is an appeal against a decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Mill ("the Judge"), promulgated on 11 April 2023. By that decision, the Judge dismissed the Appellant's appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State to refuse his protection and human rights claim.

             The Appellant is a national of India. Insofar as is relevant to this appeal, the Appellant's protection claim was based on his political opinion, namely his active support for Sikh separatist movements and organisations. The key issue on appeal was the Appellant's credibility.

             The Appellant's evidence was that, in 2012, he was attacked by a group of men and thereby sustained injuries: he was unconscious for 2 days and remained in hospital for one week [28]. Thereafter, he was discharged but remained under observation at home by the treating clinician (Appellant's witness statement, para 7). He reported the incident to the police but they took no action [37].

             On a later occasion, he was further assaulted and again reported the matter to the police. However, the police responded by arresting and torturing him (the Appellant's witness statement, paras 11 and 12). On the advice of his parents, he left India and came to UK. He has not maintained contact with them [28].