Case: 17-60821 Document: 00514900085 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/03/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 3, 2019 No. 17-60821 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk CHARNJIT SINGH; MANJEET KAUR; KRISHAN PREET SINGH; SIMAR PREET KAUR, Petitioners, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and ELROD, Circuit Judges. JENNIFER WALKER ELROD, Circuit Judge: Petitioners Charnjit Singh and his family members, who are natives and citizens of India, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying them relief from removal. We deny their petition for review. I. Charnjit Singh, his wife Manjeet, and their two children Krishan and Simar came to the United States on temporary tourist visas but overstayed their authorized period of stay. When the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated removal proceedings against the Singhs, they conceded Case: 17-60821 Document: 00514900085 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/03/2019 No. 17-60821 removability but sought relief from removal by applying for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The immigration judge (IJ) held a hearing in which the Singhs offered various types of testimonial and documentary evidence. The basis of the Singhs’ claim for relief was that Charnjit feared returning to India because of the past harm that Charnjit had suffered between the late 1980s and early 1990s on account of his political involvement in the Khalistan movement that sought to create a separate Sikh nation in the Punjab region of India. 1 In his testimony, Charnjit recounted that he witnessed “Operation Blue Star” in 1984 in which government forces attacked and massacred many Sikhs. This experience prompted Charnjit to join the Khalistan movement. Charnjit also testified that, because of his involvement in the Khalistan movement, the Punjabi police placed him on a list of terrorists and detained him in 1986, 1992, and 1993. During his 1992 detention, Charnjit was physically mistreated and suffered a permanent injury to one of his fingers. During the cross-examination by the DHS, Charnjit stated that, at his wife’s insistence, he “steered away from [the] Khalistan movement” and was no longer active in the movement after 1993. Charnjit testified that although his family eventually moved away to Delhi, the Punjabi police traveled outside of their jurisdiction to kidnap, physically abuse, and extort money from Charnjit. For example, in 2001, 2008, and 2009, Charnjit had to pay significant bribes to ransom himself or his wife out of detention and to avoid harassment. The IJ found that Charnjit suffered past persecution on account of his religion and political opinion, thus entitling Charnjit a rebuttable presumption 1 Manjeet, Krishan, and Simar filed claims that were derivative of Charnjit’s claims. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(3)(A) (generally affording derivative asylee status to the spouse or child of a person granted asylum). 2 Case: 17-60821 Document: 00514900085 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/03/2019 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals