CAT/C/57/D/583/2014 has he claimed that the Indian police believe that he personally actually engaged in militant activities. On the basis of these facts, it is highly unlikely that any risk that might have once existed for him in northern India would still exist upon his return. 4.7 Moreover, based on objective reports regarding the current situation of Sikhs in India, the complainant has a viable internal relocation alternative. 6 These reports indicate that there is no general risk of ill-treatment if the complainant is returned to India solely on the basis of his real or perceived political opinion. Given his personal profile, as understood from his own allegations in the present communication regarding his difficulties with the local Punjab police, he is unlikely to be sought by authorities outside of the Punjab region upon return to India. India is a secular republic in which citizens are not required to register their faith. Sikhs are able to practice their religion without restriction in every state in India. While the majority of Sikhs live in Punjab, there are also sizeable Sikh minorities in other states. Sikh communities, which are present throughout the country, are thriving, and many persons of the Sikh faith hold prominent official positions. From 2004 to 2014, India had a Sikh prime minister. The head of the Indian army is a Sikh. Country reports make it clear that only the highest-profile Sikh militants are at risk of arrest or of being pursued outside of Punjab. These include individuals who, unlike the complainant, are either perceived as leaders of a militant group or suspects in a terrorist attack. An individual would not normally be considered to be a high-profile militant simply because he or she has strong political views, is politically active or has a family member who is believed to be a highprofile militant. Country reports indicate that the actions of the local police in Punjab are most often not politically or religiously motivated toward a particular group or cause. The reports confirm, rather, that police in Punjab fabricate charges under the guise of suppressing threats, political or otherwise, in order to extract bribes. Based on country reports, it is reasonable to conclude that where an individual’s fear is based on treatment at the hands of the local police and the individual does not have any profile of interest to the central Indian authorities, internal relocation to other areas of India is a feasible option for managing alleged risk of future harm. Furthermore, there is no general risk of ill-treatment for Sikhs in India. Sikhs are free to move to any state in the country and do not face legal or procedural difficulties in relocating. Sikhs outside of Punjab are able to practise their religion and have access to education, employment, health care and housing; they are not viewed with heightened suspicion nor harassed by the local police simply because of their religion or the region from which they come. Nothing suggests that the complainant could not live without difficulty outside of Punjab in India. The State party notes that the Committee has considered in certain cases that an individual with a high profile as a Sikh militant may be unable to relocate to another state within India; however, the State party considers that it is clear, in the light of current conditions in India and upon a careful reading of the present communication and the decisions of the Canadian authorities, that nothing suggests that the central authorities in India would have any interest in the complainant. 6 GE.16-09779 To support its allegations in this paragraph, the State party cites several authorities on internal relocation possibilities for Sikhs in India, including United Kingdom: Home Office, Operational Guidance Note: India (May 2013), section 3.9.13; also Operational Guidance Note: India (20 February 2007), sections 3.6.10-3.6.17; Canada, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, “India: Situation of Sikhs outside the state of Punjab, including treatment by authorities; ability of Sikhs to relocate within India, including challenges they may encounter (2009-April 2013)” (13 May 2013), IND104369.E and “India: Freedom of movement, in particular, the ability to relocate freely from Punjab to other parts of India” (12 January 1999), IND30757.E; United States Department of State, International Religious Freedom Report for 2012: India; and United States Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, “India: Information on relocation of Sikhs from Punjab to other parts of India” (16 May 2013), IND03003.ZSF. 5