Indian migrant jailed for stealing vulnerable grandmother's gold chain at bus stop can remain in the UK as judge says it would be 'unduly harsh'

An Indian migrant who was jailed for stealing a 'vulnerable' grandmother's gold chain while she waited at a bus stop has been allowed to remain in the UK, after a judge ruled deporting him would be 'unduly harsh'.The 'serious offender', referred to only as AB, was jailed for five years after he was found to have also targeted another woman who was walking with her children in a pram when he snatched her gold necklace.The incident, which occurred whilst he was on drugs, caused her to fall to the ground and suffer cuts and grazes, a tribunal heard.He also has a prior conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm of a man and a woman when he was drunk.But Upper Tribunal Judge Anna-Rose Landes found that it would be 'unduly harsh' to deport the man, 30, as he has since married a British citizen and has two children with her.She also found it would be too dangerous for his family to travel to India with him because they had received 'threats' from relatives.It was found that his wife, who suffers from a rare form of inflammatory arthritis and mental health issues, would be 'devastated' without him.An immigration tribunal held in Birmingham ruled that he will be allowed to stay in the UK after he made an appeal on Human Rights grounds against a deportation order. The 'serious offender', referred to only as AB, was jailed for five years over two robberies (Pictured: Birmingham Immigration and Asylum Chambers)The Indian national, who cannot be named for legal reasons, came to the UK when he was 11 after his father was sentenced in Britain for murdering his mother in a fire.Although he returned to India, he came back during the time limit of his visit visa.His cousin applied for an extension of the visa, but this was rejected in 2013.He remained in the UK until he was arrested in 2016, and he was granted 30 months' leave to remain on personal grounds, but a later application was also rejected.In 2017, he met and married a British-born woman of Pakistani nationality and converted to Islam.This caused upset in both families with 'threats' being issued against both of them, and they were told that if they moved to India a prominent Pakistani politician, who is a relative, would kill them.Judge Landes said: 'I asked her about the threats from the Pakistani politician, and she [the wife] told me he had made threats to harm her and her family, honour-based threats.'She had heard from other people he was threatening her, and he had threatened her when she was leaving the family home for [him], he had made threats himself to her face when he came to the UK.'The Indian migrant was convicted in 2017 of assault occasioning actual bodily harm of a man and a woman when he was drunk, and he was given a suspended sentence of 12 months.Two years later, he was convicted of two robberies of 'vulnerable' women in broad daylight, while he was on drugs.The first victim was walking with her children in a pram when he stole her gold necklace, and the second was a grandmother in her late seventies, waiting at the bus stop who he targeted for her gold chain.He was jailed for five years on each offence, which he served concurrently.Judge Landes said that the Indian migrant was a 'serious offender' because he had been jailed for more than four years.She said: 'The offences of robbery were very serious, targeting two vulnerable women for their gold jewellery, [AB] being under the influence of drugs.'This was not an offence meriting a sentence just over the 4-year distinction between medium and serious offending; without a guilty plea there would have been a sentence of 5 years and 10 months' imprisonment.'There is therefore a greater public interest in deporting [him].'Nevertheless, although [AB], following the Upper Tribunal's earlier findings, is not rehabilitated, there is reason to consider he has made progress towards rehabilitation since the index offences were committed.'The sentencing remarks indicate that [he] had tried to get his life back on course by the stage of sentence.'His wife suffers from multiple medical conditions, including depression, palindromic rheumatism, fibromyalgia, anxiety and POTS.Her husband is her main carer, and also the primary carer for their two children when she is unable to be.Judge Landes said that the Indian man's deportation would be 'unduly harsh' on his family and they would not be able to go to India with him because of the threats and lack of ties to India.She said: 'Drawing everything together, I have found it would be beyond unduly harsh, indeed devastating for CD to be separated from [AB].'The effect on her of separation and the separation from their father who has been the parent mainly responsible for their care, will lead to unduly harsh consequences for the children.'CD [the wife] will not travel to India, but I have found that it would be unduly harsh for both her and the children to go to India with [him], and the children would encounter very serious difficulties in India going beyond undue harshness.'The best interests of the children lie very strongly in their remaining in the UK with [him].'I bear in mind the very serious nature of the crimes committed by [him] and that whenever a foreign criminal has a British partner and children in the UK, deportation will either separate him from that family or will mean that British citizens will have to leave the UK to be with him, and of course that is just what deportation does.'The nature of the statutory test in the case of serious offenders means that even if a foreign criminal's deportation would be unduly harsh on his British citizen partner and children, that is not sufficient to enable the foreign criminal to remain in the UK.'All this emphasises the height of the bar that needs to be met for the interests of a foreign criminal's family to outweigh the very strong public interest in his deportation.'I am, however, satisfied that that very strong interest is outweighed and there are very compelling circumstances over and above those described in the exceptions.'