Netaji wrote, " After all when it comes to the judgement on if any individual sould be allowed a VISA or not, the consel will not make judgement based not necessarily on "WHAT IT IS " but on "WHAT IT APPERS TO BE" based upon the available evidence she/he has. She/he does not have any obligation to go deep into the matter." What does it "of Mr. Baniya" appears to you? Look! evidence to consular is, what appears in the paper, they don't have to sneak inside somebody's personal life to find out what exactly is the case. In the case of Mr. Baniya, as he already mention in his statement that He had shown the evidence of $200 Thou in his bank account and all doctors reports and recommendation stating that the Diesease under any circumstances can't be treated in and out of the country except in US ( aba luxemburg ma ni treatement cha bhane ta kollai thaha, Manche le khojne nai tehi ho ni Nepal ma Hudaina bhane Bharat, CHina natra US) , and he has tangible evidence that is his son and daughter, what else they need more ? I think those evidence are good enough for him to be qualify. Atleast better than giving away Visa to Tibetean Monk without any evidence other than BALD HEAD AND DANGREE OUTFIT. My point is if consular do rational judgement even remaing within a boundry of prescribed regulation, there is no way these sort people wont get visa, who actually is in dire need. To get or not to get, its all depend on their personal baisness.