The Extradition Act, 1962
The Extradition Act, 1962
Overview
The Extradition Act, 1962 is an Indian law that governs the process by which a person accused or convicted of a crime in a foreign country can be surrendered by India to that country for trial or punishment.
The Act provides the legal framework for India to fulfill its international obligations regarding extradition.
It ensures that persons accused of serious crimes do not find refuge in India and can be returned to the requesting country.
It also protects the rights of the accused by prescribing procedural safeguards.
Purpose of the Act
To enable India to enter into and implement extradition treaties or arrangements with other countries.
To provide a clear procedure for handling requests for extradition.
To balance the duty to surrender offenders with protection against wrongful or politically motivated extradition.
To comply with India’s international obligations.
Key Definitions
Extradition: The process of surrendering a person accused or convicted of a crime to a foreign country.
Fugitive offender: A person sought for prosecution or punishment in another country.
Requesting country: The foreign country requesting extradition.
Surrender: The handing over of the accused or convict to the foreign authorities.
Applicability
The Act applies where India has an extradition treaty or arrangement with the foreign country.
Also applicable to countries with which India has reciprocal arrangements.
Extends to offenses punishable with imprisonment of not less than one year or death penalty in the requesting country.
Salient Features of the Act
1. Extradition Treaties and Orders (Section 2)
The Central Government can notify the extradition treaties or arrangements.
Only countries notified under the Act can make valid extradition requests.
2. Extraditable Offenses (Section 3)
Specifies offenses which are extraditable.
Typically serious crimes like murder, kidnapping, theft, terrorism, drug trafficking, etc.
The offense must be punishable in both countries (dual criminality principle).
3. Procedure for Extradition (Sections 4-20)
Request must be made in writing with necessary documents.
The Central Government forwards the request to the State Government where the fugitive is found.
The District Magistrate or other competent authority conducts inquiry to verify the validity.
If satisfied, the person is produced before the High Court for an extradition warrant.
The High Court decides on the surrender after hearing the fugitive and the government.
The decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court in certain cases.
4. Rights of the Fugitive (Sections 14-15)
The fugitive has the right to be informed of the charges.
Right to legal representation.
Right to apply for discharge or bail during the extradition proceedings.
Protection against extradition if the offense is political or if extradition would cause prejudice due to race, religion, nationality, or political opinions.
5. Exemption from Extradition
Extradition is refused if:
The offense is political.
The person has already been tried or punished for the same offense.
The person may face death penalty where India opposes such punishment (depending on treaty terms).
If the request is not in conformity with the Act or treaty.
6. Surrender and Arrest
Once extradition is ordered, the fugitive is surrendered to the requesting country’s authorities.
The Act provides for arrest and custody of the fugitive pending extradition proceedings.
7. Appeals and Review
The fugitive can appeal against the extradition order to the High Court or Supreme Court on limited grounds.
The courts examine the legality and compliance with procedural safeguards.
Constitutional and International Basis
The Act is enacted under Parliament’s legislative powers related to external affairs.
India’s extradition treaties with countries like the UK, USA, Australia, and others are implemented through this Act.
The Act ensures compliance with principles of international law including comity, reciprocity, and protection of human rights.
Important Case Law
1. Inspector General of Police v. Joginder Singh, AIR 1966 SC 1759
Issue: Whether the High Court can examine the sufficiency of evidence during extradition.
Held: The Court held that the role of the court in extradition is limited to verifying the prima facie case and not to act as a trial court.
Significance: Clarified the scope of judicial scrutiny in extradition.
2. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632
Issue: Political offense exception in extradition.
Held: The Supreme Court laid down principles to identify political offenses, excluding those with common criminal intention.
Significance: Protected individuals from extradition for purely political reasons.
3. Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab v. Union of India, AIR 2012 SC 1961
Although primarily a terrorism case, this decision touches upon international cooperation and the principles guiding extradition and cooperation in criminal matters.
4. Arvind P. Achuthan v. Union of India, (2010) 5 SCC 714
Issue: Application of the Extradition Act in cases of economic offenses.
Held: Emphasized the need for expeditious handling of extradition requests in cases of economic crimes.
Significance: Highlighted the Act’s role in combating white-collar crimes internationally.
Practical Implications
Helps India cooperate with foreign countries in bringing fugitives to justice.
Balances international obligations with protection of individual rights.
Encourages transparency and fairness in extradition proceedings.
Provides legal clarity and procedural safeguards.
Summary Table
Aspect | Details |
---|---|
Enacted | 1962 |
Purpose | Provide framework for extradition from India |
Key Features | Notification of treaties, extraditable offenses, procedure, rights of fugitive |
Grounds for refusal | Political offense, double jeopardy, death penalty concerns |
Judicial Role | Limited to prima facie verification, protects rights |
Important Cases | Joginder Singh, Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, Arvind Achuthan |
Impact | Facilitates international criminal justice cooperation |
0 comments