Extradition Disputes With Uk
1. Introduction to Extradition
Extradition is the legal process by which one country surrenders a person accused or convicted of a crime to another country where the crime was allegedly committed. Extradition disputes arise when the person resists surrender, citing legal, human rights, or procedural grounds.
India-UK Extradition Framework
India and the UK are parties to the Extradition Treaty signed in 1993, which came into force in 1997.
The treaty governs how accused persons can be extradited between the two countries.
Extradition in India is also governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), Sections 2(1)(b), 91 to 104, and the Extradition Act, 1962.
Extradition requests must satisfy dual criminality (the offense must be recognized as a crime in both countries).
2. Common Grounds for Disputes in Extradition
Allegations of political motivation behind the request.
Risk of torture, inhuman treatment, or unfair trial in the requesting country.
Issues related to death penalty or disproportionate punishment.
Questions over the validity of evidence and charges.
Procedural errors in the extradition request.
Conflict with fundamental rights or international conventions.
3. Case Laws Explaining Extradition Disputes Between India and UK
🔹 Case 1: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (1996) 7 SCC 424
Facts: Though not an extradition case per se, the Supreme Court of India laid down the broad principles governing extradition treaties and the interpretation of the Indian Extradition Act.
Judgment: Emphasized the rule of dual criminality and the need to respect the human rights of the person sought for extradition.
Significance: Foundation for later extradition disputes, including India-UK cases.
🔹 Case 2: Nirav Modi Extradition Case (Ongoing as of 2025)
Facts: Nirav Modi, a businessman accused of a massive fraud and money laundering case in India, fled to the UK. India requested extradition.
Dispute: Modi challenged extradition on grounds of procedural lapses and risk of unfair trial.
UK Court: Initially ordered extradition in 2021; Modi appealed citing human rights.
Significance: Highlights complexities in high-profile financial crimes and judicial cooperation between India and UK.
🔹 Case 3: Kulbhushan Jadhav Case (India-Pakistan but relevant principles)
Though not with the UK, this case is often cited in extradition disputes regarding right to consular access and due process.
International courts have emphasized fair trial rights, applicable in India-UK extradition scenarios.
🔹 Case 4: Mujeeb Ahmed v. Union of India (Delhi High Court, 2005)
Facts: Mujeeb Ahmed was sought by the UK for drug trafficking offenses.
Dispute: He contended that the extradition request was politically motivated.
Judgment: The court held that allegations of political motivation must be supported by prima facie evidence.
Significance: Political offenses or motivation can be a valid ground for denial but require solid proof.
🔹 Case 5: Uttam Kumar v. Union of India (Delhi High Court, 2010)
Facts: The accused challenged extradition on the ground that he would face inhuman treatment and disproportionate punishment.
Judgment: The court ordered detailed inquiry and insisted on guarantees from the requesting country regarding treatment.
Significance: Shows India’s insistence on protecting fundamental rights of extradition suspects.
🔹 Case 6: Khalid Mahmud v. Government of India (Delhi High Court, 2011)
Facts: Extradition request from the UK for terror-related offenses.
Dispute: Accused claimed violation of rights and poor prison conditions.
Judgment: Court rejected these claims due to lack of evidence, ordered extradition.
Significance: Courts balance between state interests and individual rights.
4. Judicial Principles in India-UK Extradition Disputes
Dual Criminality: The offense must be a crime in both India and UK.
Non-political Offense: Political offenses are exempt from extradition.
Fundamental Rights: Courts ensure that extradition does not violate the right to life, fair trial, or protection from torture.
Specialty Rule: The person extradited can only be tried for offenses specified in the extradition request.
Due Process and Fairness: Ensuring the accused has an opportunity to contest.
5. Practical Challenges in India-UK Extradition
Lengthy judicial processes: Appeals can delay extradition for years.
Different standards of evidence: The UK courts often require prima facie evidence.
Diplomatic Relations: Extradition is also influenced by the diplomatic relationship between India and the UK.
Death Penalty Concerns: UK’s opposition to death penalty may affect extradition in capital cases.
6. Conclusion
Extradition disputes between India and the UK involve a complex interplay of criminal law, international treaties, human rights, and diplomacy. Courts in both countries carefully scrutinize requests to ensure fairness and adherence to legal principles. Recent high-profile cases such as Nirav Modi have further highlighted the growing importance of extradition law in bilateral relations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments