Kaur
Kaur v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Where, as here, “the BIA adopts the Id’s decision while adding its own reasons, *609 we review both decisions.”
The IJ denied Kaur’s 2 petition because he found that whatever persecution she suffered was attributable to the Indian police’s interest in her brother-in-law, Bhupindr Singh. The IJ presumed this interest in Bhupindr to be legitimate. This presumption was incorrect as a matter of law. As Singh v. Ilchert 3 teaches, where “there is no evidence of a legitimate prosecutorial purpose for a government’s harassment of a person there arises a presumption that the motive for harassment is political.”
The BIA rested its decision on this infirm legal basis and also upon its conclusion that Kaur’s encounters with police did not rise to the level of persecution. The evidence compels the contrary conclusion. 5 Indian police terrorized the petitioner and her family by coming to her home, often in the wee hours of the morning, on seven occasions during a four-month period leading up to her departure. Each time, police shoved her and her family members, yelled at her, asked her why she was “raising her voice for Khalistan” and accused her of being a terrorist.…