Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Charn Kamal Singh v Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [Decision On Leave Application]

Judgment Cited authorities 1 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date03 June 2020
Neutral Citation[2020] HKCFI 999
Judgement NumberHCAL182/2018
Subject MatterConstitutional and Administrative Law Proceedings
CourtCourt of First Instance (Hong Kong)
HCAL182/2018 CHARN KAMAL SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

HCAL 182/2018

[2020] HKCFI 999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 182 of 2018

BETWEEN

Charn Kamal Singh Applicant
and
Torture Claims Appeal Board /
Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office		 Putative Respondent

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following:

consideration of the documents only; or
consideration of the documents and the Applicant being present / absent in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan:

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Observations for the Applicant:

1. The Applicant is a 36-year-old national of India who arrived in Hong Kong on 30 December 2013 with permission to remain as a visitor up to 13 January 2014 when he did not depart and instead overstayed and surrendered to the Immigration Department on 3 March 2014 and subsequently raised a non-refoulement claim on the basis that if he returned to India he would be harmed or killed by the family members of the victim of a traffic accident for which he was blamed and/or by members of the political party Shiromani Akali Dal (“SAD”) as the victim was one of their fellow and important member. He has since been released on recognizance pending the determination of his claim.

2. The Applicant was born and raised in New Shimla Puri, Ludhiana, Punjab, India. After leaving school he mainly worked as a driver and became a supporter of the political party Congress Party (“CP”).

3. One day in November 2013 while he was driving from Ludhiana to Delhi, he struck a motorcycle and ran over the motorcyclist in a traffic accident. As he panicked he fled from the scene without stopping or reporting the accident to the police.

4. Later when he was told that the motorcyclist had died from the accident and that he was some influential member of SAD, the Applicant quitted his job and hid in his home,but when he heard that some men were looking for him, and that on one occasion when he was attacked by some unknown men on the street with hockey sticks, he suspected that they were either family members of the victim or SAD members trying to take revenge against him, he became fearful for his life that on 30 December 2013 he departed India for Hong Kong where he subsequently overstayed and raised his non-refoulement claim,for which he completed a Non-refoulement Claim Form on 30 October 2015 and attended screening interview before the Immigration Department with legal representation from the Duty Lawyer Service.

5. By a Notice of Decision dated 11 March 2016 the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) rejected the Applicant’s claim on all then applicable grounds including risk of torture under Part VIIC of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap 115 (“torture risk”), risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights (“HKBOR”) (“BOR 3 risk”), and risk of persecution with reference to the non-refoulement principle under Article 33 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (“persecution risk”).

6. In his decision the Director took into account all the relevant circumstances of the Applicant’s claim and assessed the level of risk of harm from his perceived enemies upon his return to India as low due to the low intensity and frequency of past ill-treatment from them, that there is no reliable evidence that he had been targeted by the family members of the victim or by the SAD members that any threats that they were going to take revenge against him for the traffic accident was merely his own speculation, that in the absence of any official involvement that state or police...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT