Indian woman facing deportation granted residency in New Zealand after husband’s previous sponsorship of two former partners

Indian woman facing deportation granted residency in NZ after husband’s previous relationships

An Indian woman has been granted residency in New Zealand after a tribunal found her case involved exceptional humanitarian circumstances. She had become unlawfully present in the country following an immigration complication linked to her husband’s past sponsorship of two former partners.Aradhana Goswami travelled from India to New Zealand in late 2024 to marry her partner. She faced deportation after discovering that her husband’s immigration history prevented him from supporting her application for a partnership-based visa.The IPT allowed Goswami to remain in New Zealand after finding that the circumstances behind her immigration problems were unusual and that deporting her would be unfair.The case centred on Goswami’s husband, who had previously sponsored two former partners for New Zealand residency, once in 2013 and again in 2019. Under New Zealand immigration rules, a person who has already supported two successful partnership-based residence applications cannot sponsor another partner for residence.Despite this, Goswami was granted a visitor visa before travelling to New Zealand on 7 November 2024. In her application, she made clear that she intended to spend time with her future husband before marriage.She told immigration authorities she wanted to spend time with “the love of her life” before “entering into a lifelong commitment,” according to the New Zealand Herald.The couple married19 days after her arrival.According to the tribunal’s decision, Goswami’s husband’s sponsorship history had been disclosed to Immigration New Zealand (INZ) during the visitor visa process. The tribunal said that officials approved the application and recorded there were “no concerns”.But when Goswami applied for a partnership-based work visa, the application was rejected because her husband was not eligible to support it under immigration rules. A request for reconsideration was also declined.She later received an interim visa, but it expired in May 2025, leaving her unlawfully present in New Zealand.In June 2025, Goswami appealed to the IPT on humanitarian grounds, arguing that being forced to leave would separate her from her husband and end their marriage.She told the tribunal that her husband moved to New Zealand from Fiji as a teenager and had no meaningful ties to India and was unlikely to relocate because he was the primary caregiver for his elderly parents.Goswami also said that returning alone to India would expose her to social stigma.Her representatives said that the couple did not hide anything and were very transparent with immigration authorities throughout the process.“Her intention to marry and have a future together with her partner was declared in her visitor visa application,” they submitted.“The appellant and her husband truthfully declared their true intentions to Immigration New Zealand, and he declared his previous partnerships.”The tribunal accepted there were no doubts about the authenticity of the marriage. It also considered medical evidence showing Goswami was suffering emotional distress, including poor sleep, loss of appetite, constant worry and dizziness.Addressing her fears about returning to India, the decision said: “She says that the emotional toll of being viewed as a ‘failure’ in the eyes of society, and the overwhelming shame that would come with it, would be unbearable.”The IPT concluded that Goswami was not responsible for the situation that had made her liable for deportation. It also ruled that allowing her to stay would not be against the public interest.Immigration New Zealand rejected the idea that it had made a mistake. INZ director for visas Chris Adamson said the visitor visa and the later partnership visa were assessed under different rules.“When Ms Goswami later applied for a partnership-based temporary visa, her partner was assessed under the standard process and did not meet the requirements because he had previously supported more than one successful residence visa application,” Adamson said.They added: “We understand that Ms Goswami’s situation arose through no fault of her own and that she may have expected to continue living in New Zealand after being granted her initial visa. However, our position is that both applications were assessed correctly against the immigration settings at the time.”Despite that position, the tribunal sided with Goswami’s appeal and granted her a resident visa, bringing an end to a months-long immigration battle that threatened to separate the newly married couple.