An Indian national who was jailed for torturing a woman and later returned to Britain unlawfully after being deported has lost his latest legal battle to remain in the UK.

Rupinderjit Singh was sentenced to 12 years in prison in 2004 after being convicted of causing grievous bodily harm with intent following a prolonged attack on a 30-year-old woman.

He was deported to India in 2016 but later re-entered the UK in breach of the deportation order.

The Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber has now dismissed his human rights appeal, finding that the public interest in his deportation outweighed his Article 8 claim to remain on family-life grounds. The decision was issued on September 22 and published on October 7.

Woman tortured with boiling water

The tribunal considered the sentencing remarks from Singh’s original criminal case.

The court heard that the woman was subjected to a sustained attack after Singh suspected she had allowed somebody into a property where £7,000 had allegedly been stolen from his girlfriend’s handbag.

She had boiling water poured over her, was set alight and was beaten with a belt.

The victim spent weeks in hospital and was left with permanent scarring.

The sentencing judge described Singh as a “particularly callous character”.

Deportation order remained in force

A deportation order was made in 2009, but Singh was not removed from the UK until 2016.

He attempted to return in 2019 before successfully re-entering Britain unlawfully in 2020 while the deportation order remained in force.

Singh later made fresh protection and human rights claims.

A First-tier Tribunal initially allowed his Article 8 appeal, but the Home Office challenged that decision, and the case ultimately returned to the Upper Tribunal for a fresh determination.

Family-life arguments rejected

Singh argued that he needed to remain in Britain to help care for his daughter, who is autistic.

His wife told the tribunal that their daughter experienced serious behavioural difficulties and sometimes required two adults to care for her.

Upper Tribunal Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor found that Singh and his wife had exaggerated the evidence concerning the extent of those difficulties.

The judge also rejected claims made by Singh about his own mental health, describing that evidence as a “complete fabrication”.

Judge cites ‘blatant disregard’ for immigration controls

The tribunal placed significant weight on the seriousness of Singh’s original offence and his decision to return to Britain despite an existing deportation order.

Judge Norton-Taylor said his unlawful return demonstrated a “blatant disregard” for immigration controls.

The tribunal also considered Singh’s use of aliases, the extent of any remorse for his offending and his assessed risk of causing further harm.

The judge concluded that Singh had failed to show circumstances sufficiently compelling to outweigh the strong public interest in his deportation.

The ruling dismisses Singh’s human rights appeal and removes the protection previously granted by the First-tier Tribunal.

Any actual removal from the UK would remain subject to the normal immigration process and any further legal challenge available to him.