The Indian government opposed the reopening, arguing that protective measures would prevent breaches of assurances given by India. Nirav’s lawyers referenced another case involving Sanjay Bhandari, who was spared extradition due to similar human rights concerns, highlighting systemic torture risks in Indian custody.
Photo : PTI
Fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi has moved an application seeking permission to reopen his extradition appeal concluded in the High Court in London, claiming that he faces a “real risk of torture” during interrogations by the
investigating agencies in India.
Lord Jeremy Stuart-Smith and Justice Robert Jay, presiding over the appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice, reserved their judgment at the end of a day-long hearing on Tuesday, PTI reported.
“This case is of extreme importance, to Mr Modi and to the Indian officials who have travelled from India. We will deliver the judgment as soon as possible,” said Stuart-Smith.
The Indian government, represented by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), argued against the grounds for reopening a matter in which Nirav Modi’s extradition had been ordered nearly six years ago.
CPS barrister Helen Malcolm appealed to the court to adopt a common sense approach as the case is entirely exceptional and significant protective factors exist which will ensure the assurances given by the government of India are not breached, not least due to the prospect of adversely impacting future extradition proceedings between India and the UK.
What claims Nirav Modi made in his appeal?
During the hearing, Nirav’s barrister Edward Fitzgerald KC argued that the extradition poses a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or torture arising from interrogation in India.
Further, in his appeal, Nirav sought to underplay the assurances given by the government of India as neither adequate nor reliable to meet the risk posed by the prospect of additional non-bailable warrants being executed.
Nirav’s Barrister further alleged that his client could even be moved from Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai to Gujarat to be interrogated by agencies other than the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED).
During the hearing, Nirav’s lawyers relied heavily on the extradition case of Sanjay Bhandari, who is a defence sector consultant accused of tax evasion and money laundering.
Bhandari was discharged from extradition bail on human rights grounds last year.
What was Sanjay Bhandari case?
Last year, a Delhi special court had declared UK-based arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari a Fugitive Economic Offender under the Fugitive Economic Offenders (FEO) Act.
He was charged in connection with an income tax case involving undisclosed foreign assets.
However, later on his appeal, the UK High Court had blocked Bhandari’s extradition on human rights grounds, citing risks of extortion and violence in Indian custody.
The UK High Court judges, Timothy Holroyde and Karen Steyn, said in a written ruling that the use of torture to obtain confessions was endemic.
