EXTRADITION OF CRIMINALS FROM FOREIGN COUNTIRES: IS

IT A TIME CONSUMING PROCESS?

By

H.SIMRAN

18LLB034

Semester: 4th

Name of the programme: 2 year (B.A., LL.B.)

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Name of the Faculty Member

Miss. Soma Bhattacharya

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYAPRASTHA , SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM – 531035 ANDHRA

PRADESH, INDIA

Date of Submission: 12 Dec 2020

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to our lecturer Miss. Soma
Bhattacharya Maam who has given me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on
the topic “Extradition of criminals from foreign countries: is it a time consuming process? ”
which also helped me in doing a lot of research and through which I came to know so many
new things. I am really thankful to her.
 INDEX

Topics Page No’s

1. Synopsis……………………………………………………………………..1
2. Introduction………………………………………………………………….5
3. Significance and Purpose……………………………………………………7
4. General Principles of Extradition……………………………………………8
5. Extradition process…………………………………………………………..9
6. Extradition and Interpole……………………………………………………16
7. Successful extradition cases…………………………………………………18
8. Unsuccessful extradition cases………………………………………………21
9. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………25
10. Reference…………………………………………………………………….26
 SYNOPSIS
Title: Extradition of criminals from foreign countries: is it a time consuming process?

Introduction:

With the advent of globalisation and increased interconnectivity, it has become less difficult
for offenders in India to escape to foreign jurisdictions and avoid prosecution in the country.
The importance of extraditing fugitives and bringing them before Indian courts cannot be
stressed enough. Apart from providing timely justice and grievance redressal, it also serves as
a deterrent against potential fugitives. However, India’s success rate in extraditing fugitives is
abysmally low; only one in every three fugitives are being successfully extradited to India.
This research examines the extradition treaties that India has with various countries, and
gives an overview of India’s successes and failures in securing the return of offenders. It also
studies both the legal and nonlegal obstacles to extradition, and offers recommendations to
improve India’s extradition process.

Aims And Objectives:

The main aim and objective of the project is to make a detailed study on the process of
extradition in India along with the Indian Extradition Act, 1962.

Scope of the study:

The study analysis the process of extradition of criminals to India. It also analysis the
landmark cases of extradition in India and how it had been possible.

Research questions:

1. Whether the extradition process consumes valuable time.

2. Whether the extradition treaties are enforceable legally.

Significance of the study:

With the ever-growing connectivity across the globe, there has been a humongous growth in
the crimes committed internationally. Thus, extradition is a very effective way in which
cooperation among foreign nations shall help in curbing these crimes at international level
and at the individual level as well. The present study is about extradition process in India. It
analysis how the treaties of extradition have been formulated and enforced legally under the
Criminal Procedure Code.

1
Research Methodology:

The researcher has used doctrinal and analytical method of research. The researcher has
confined her study to various books related to criminal law.

 Sources of data:-
a. Primary source-The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and The Extradition
Act,1962
b. Secondary source- Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, Criminal Procedure Code, 21st Edition;
Sarkar, Commentary on Criminal Procedure Code, 10th Edition, Vol 2, 2012 and legal
data resources such as Manupatra, SCC Online, Westlaw etc.

Literature review:

 Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, Criminal Procedure Code, 21st Edition

Learned yet simple in its approach, it allows us to quickly grasp the principles of
Criminal Procedure and Criminology. All technical rules of procedure have been
illustrated and explained in a lucid, comprehensive and systematic manner. The 21nd
edition of this work has been painstakingly updated to include the latest case law,
legislative amendments and current developments in the law relating to criminal
procedure in India. 
 Sarkar, Commentary on Criminal Procedure Code, 10th Edition, Vol 2, 2012
This work has acquired richness in content, quality and comprehensiveness through
successive editions published over the years. This edition has been extensively and
meticulously revised, taking into account the changes brought about by recent
legislative amendments as well as important judgments of Supreme Court and various
High courts
Legal provisions that were recently amended or newly introduced have been
incorporated in the commentary along with precise synopses for quick and easy
reference.
 India-The Extradition Act, 1962
Citation: International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 13, Issue 1
(January 1964), pp. 116-138
This article discusses about the extradition in British period. It also discusses about
how the native states in India during the British period functioned under the act. The
principles of Extradition are explained in a lucid manner. The amended Act,1962 has

2
 also been included to make the reader aware of the changes. It also makes the reader
aware of certain important meanings usually used in the extradition act. The
conditions which don’t favour extradition are also explained in brief. It briefly
discusses the difference between Chapter 2 & Chapter 3 of the Act and clears the
doubts of the reader.
 International Extradition and Global Terrorism: Bringing International
Criminals to Justice
Joyner, Christopher C., Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative
Law Review, Vol. 25, Issue 3 (Summer 2003), pp. 493-542
This article accepts the long- established premise that a law-enforcement approach, ad
opposed to the currently popular law-of-armed-conflict approach, is the principal
means of dealing with global terrorism. Using military force governed by
humanitarian terrorism policy. It is vital that governments practice a law enforcement
approach as well. It discusses how it is the responsibility of the state to look after the
civilians no to harm any foreign state or person. The jurisdictional authority in such
cases in also explained along with various principles.

Chapterization:

I. INDRODUCTION
II. SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE OF EXTRADITION
III. GENERAL PRINCIPALS OF EXTRADITION
IV. EXTRADITION PROCESS
V. EXTRADITION AND INTERPOLE
VI. SUCCESSFUL EXTRADITION CASES
VII. UNSUCCESSFUL EXTRADITION CASES
VIII. CONCLUSION
IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY

3
 TABLE OF CASES

Case name Citation

Abu Salem Abdul Qayoom Ansari vs State (2011) 11 SCC 214
Of Maharashtra & Anr
Vijay Mallaya vs State bank on India [2019] EWHC 1849 (Admin)
Daya Singh Lahoria v. Union of India AIR 2001 SC 1716
Ranjit Singh GILL and Sukhminder Singh 747 F. Supp. 1028 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)
Sandh v. Romolo J. IMUNDI
Mohammed Hanif Umerji Patel Case
Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of (2009). 9SCC 551.
Maharashtra,
Nirav Modi case
Charles Gurumukh Sobhraj v/s Union Of 1978 AIR, 1514
India
Sanjeev Chawala Case (2018) EWHC 1050
Devendra Singh Bhullar case 1993
Chhota Rajan case 1992
Brofos case 1986

I. INTRODUCTION

4
Extradition is derived from Latin word traditum, which in simple terms means ‘delivery of
criminals’, ‘surrender of fugitives’ or ‘handover of fugitives’. Extradition is an official
process followed by so many countries which enables one country to transfer a suspended or
a criminal to another country. The countries enter in to the treaties to regulate the extradition
process. While enforcing extradition process those were been regulated by the law among
different nations. The concept may be also known as ‘rendition’ which means performance or
interpretation.

Extradition is getting gradual recognition by nations in their intercourse with one another.
The main reason behind this is the great expansion of the subject worldwide. Originally only
domestic criminals were prosecuted and punished but foreign criminals were regarded as
objects of peculiar favour and were not prosecuted except in some cases, later in as time
changed there was a revolution in the opinion on the subject of extradition. Instead the idea of
asylum, there has been established the right of the state either to extradite or to expel any
offender who comes within his jurisdiction. This right is recognised by almost all the states.
Although the change in opinion on the subject of extradition had been rapid, but the result
was extraordinary and helped in attaining the modern development.

Extradition is the delivery on the part of one State to another of those whom it is desired to
deal with for crimes of which they have been accused or convicted and are justifiable in the
Courts of the other State’. An Extradition request for an accused can be initiated in the case
of under-investigation, under-trial and convicted criminals. In cases under investigation,
abundant precautions have to be exercised by the law enforcement agency to ensure that it is
in possession of prima facie evidence to sustain the allegation before the Courts of Law in the
Foreign State.1

Extradition is a formal process whereby on the basis of bilateral or multilateral treaties or

done for a particular basis the States grant each other mutual judicial assistance in criminal
matters. Asylum means offering sanctuary to those at risk and in danger, in compliance with
State’s obligations under international refugee law, human rights law and customary
International Law. Over time, both areas have undergone significant legal and practical
developments.

Extradition is a very crucial legal tool for the administrative of criminal justice. India also
like many other countries has put in a statutory legal framework to do the same. The Indian

1
Hon’ble Supreme Court
5
statutory regime of extradition is currently provided by the Indian Extradition Act, 1962 with
its latest amendment in 1993.

II. SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE OF EXTRADITION

6
Sometimes informal relationships and sanctions are insufficient to establish and maintain the
desired social order. The government or the state may impose more formalised or strict
system of social control. With institutional and legal machinery at their disposal agents of the
state can compel the population to confirm the certain rules and codes and can opt to punish
those who do not follow them. Authorities employ various mechanisms both encouraging and
discouraging to regulate certain behaviours in general.

International and national security rests a lot on effective administration of criminal justice.
In a politically divided world states inevitably encounter sovereign barriers to extend their
individual arms of criminal justice mechanism beyond their national boundaries. As a result,
the unavailability of the offender (accused or guilty) within the national boundaries is
obviously a major setback to the victim state which is eager to put into motion its criminal
justice mechanism in respect of him.

A noteworthy development which added a new dimension to extradition law is the growing
international allegiance to human rights ideology. Whereas for a long time the nature of
offence or interests of sovereign states alone remained in focus, the new thrust on human
rights ideology successfully brought into focus even the interests of the concerned fugitive
criminal. Until recently, the rule of respect for sovereignty prevented the judiciary and the
executive considering the extradition request prevented from inquiring into the fairness of the
requesting nation’s justice system. The rule of non inquiry, born out of concern for courtesy
and friendship between governments has given way to a new concern for the rights of
individuals.

As a result the possibility of violation of most fundamental rights like right to life and
freedom from torture of the fugitive criminal became a weighty factor in the decision over the
request for extradition.

In the current era serious crimes like terrorism, drug trafficking, economic offences of high
magnitude are threatening national as well as international security. In view of the
devastating consequences of these crimes throwing serious challenges to the individual and
collective security of international community, extradition as a tool of state cooperation for
tackling the crimes across the world has but acquired extraordinary significance. So much so,
international instruments designed to tackle serious crimes like drug trafficking have
themselves began to constitute the legal basis for conceding to extradition requests.

7
 III. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF EXTRADITION CASES

There are numerous general principles applied to extradition cases internationally.

Principle of Dual Criminality: Extradition can only be enforced when the act in question is
an offence in both jurisdictions (i.e. the State requesting and State requested). The raison
d'être is to provide the State requested with the volition to refuse to extradite the fugitive
offender if their conduct is, according to them, not considered to be of criminal nature.

Principle of Specialty: In order to inhibit blanket extradition requests, an extradited

individual may only be tried for offences explicitly stated in the extradition request. Only
upon the fugitive offender’s surrender to the requesting State can this principle be waived.
This allows the fugitive offender to be tried for offences in furtherance of the offences for
which they were surrendered for.

Exception for Political and Military Offences: Any extradition must be declined if the
request is being made in attempts to charge an individual for a political or purely military
offence. Although the term ‘political offence’ has not been clearly defined in international
law, it is thought to include, but is not limited to, the expression of political opinions.
However, it is largely subject to the domestic law of the State requested. It must be noted that
acts of terrorism committed with a political motive and other violent crimes do not fall under
this exception.

Existence of prima facie case against the fugitive : This is a safety valve to ensure, at-least
on broad probabilities, the existence of a triable case against the fugitive. This is sought to be
ensured by a magisterial inquiry that is to precede the actual surrender/extradition. If the case
lacks merit on the face of it, extradition may be disallowed at the very outset.

EXTRADITION TREATY & EXTRADITION AGREEMENT

The major difference between a treaty and arrangement is similar to a written agreement and
a verbal agreement, or a binding agreement and nonbinding agreement.

The Extradition Treaty is signed after keeping in view the divergence between the laws of
various countries. The treaty generally accepts the principle of dual criminality, so a person
who is a fugitive in India will also be treated as a fugitive and criminal in the country in
which he / she seeks asylum.

8
As far as arrangements are concerned the countries agree to assist mutually in “legal
procedures” , without any binding agreement.

India has bilateral extradition treaties with 43 countries and extradition arrangements with 10
countries. Unlike treaty mechanisms, where states are obligated to consider requests for
extradition, “extradition arrangements” are non-binding and do not impose any legal
obligations on party states. India does not have extradition treaties with several neighbouring
states, such as China, Pakistan, Myanmar and Afghanistan.

Requests for surrender of fugitives can also be made to non-treaty states. These requests will
be considered in accordance with laws and procedures of the foreign state, and with the
assurance of reciprocity from India.

Many security threats originate from border areas and flourish due to challenges presented by
difficult terrain, harsh climate and poor border infrastructure. With the absence of a defined
treaty mechanism, India finds it difficult to secure the surrender of criminals who flee to
India’s Border States.

IV. EXTRADITION PROCESS

Domestically, the Extradition Act, 1962 (thereafter “Extradition Act”) governs the laws and
processes for the extradition of fugitives from India to a foreign country, or vice versa. The
Ministry of External Affairs is the designated central authority for all incoming and outgoing
extradition requisitions2 for the surrender of a fugitive criminal.

Section 2(c) of Extradition Act defines Extradition Offence as:-

 Offence provided in the extradition treaty with the foreign states; (with respect to
treaty states)

 An offence punishable with imprisonment not less than one year under India Law or
law of a foreign state. (non-treaty states)

 Composite offence - offence committed wholly, or in part, in India and Foreign State,
which would constitute an extradition offence in India.

2
Aarshi Tirkey, "India's Challenges in Extraditing Fugitives from Foreign Countries", Issue Brief No. 270, 
November 2018, Observer Research Foundation.

9
A fugitive criminal as Per S.2(f) is a person who:
Who is accused or convicted of an extradition offence committed within the jurisdiction of a
foreign state;

If a person is participating in the commission of an offence in a foreign state from within the
shares of India then he is also liable to be extradited and is included within the expansive
definition of a 'fugitive criminal'.

S.2(f) of the Extradition Act further applies to a person who, while in India:

 conspires,

 attempts to commit

 incites

 participates - as an accomplice in the commission of extradition offence in a foreign

state.

Therefore, a person in India, attempting/conspiring/abetting the commission of the offence

from within the shores of India, is also covered in the definition of a 'fugitive criminal' and
liable to be extradited.

Information regarding the fugitive criminals wanted in foreign countries is received directly
from the concerned country or through the General Secretariat of the ICPO-Interpol in the
form of red notices. The Interpol Wing of the Central Bureau of Investigation immediately
passes it on to the concerned police organizations. The red notices received from the General
Secretariat are circulated to all the State Police authorities and immigration authorities.3

The question arises that what action, if any, can be taken by the Police on receipt of an
information regarding a fugitive criminal wanted in a foreign country. In this connection the
following provisions of law are relevant:

 Action can be taken under the Indian Extradition Act Article No. 34 (b) of 1962. This
act provides procedure for the arrest and extradition of fugitive criminals under

3
‘Interpol Guide-Extradition’ (15th Nov, 2020 4:12 P.M)

10
certain conditions, which includes receipt of the request through diplomatic channels
only and under the warrant issued by a Magistrate having a competent jurisdiction.

Cr.P.C Provisions:

Section 41- When police may arrest without warrant

Section 41(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 lays down the condition upon
which a police officer has the right to arrest an individual without a warrant. Sub-
Section (g) of Section 41 provides that if the police have a reasonable complaint or a
credible information against an act of an individual which is committed at a place
outside India and if such an act would have been committed in India would be
punishable as an offence, the police has the right to arrest or detain such individual
without a warrant in India. In other words, this sub-section gives the police the power
to arrest a person without a warrant if such individual is involved in an act outside
India which would be punishable as an offence in India.

Section 166A of CrPC- Letter of request to a competent authority for

investigation in a country or place outside India.

This section says that if during the course of investigation for an offence, an
application is made by an investigating officer who states that evidence may be
available in a country or place outside India, then any criminal court may issue a letter
of request to a Court or any authority in that particular country who is competent to
deal with the request. The request may involve examining the person who may be
acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or retrieving any document
which may be in possession of the person being questioned pertaining to the case.
Each document or statement shall be treated as an evidence as received in the course
of the investigation. The court issuing the letter of request must follow the rules as
specified by the Central Government in this behalf. The country so requesting to
conduct an investigation in another country shall have to be bound by the extradition
treaty that the two countries have. If a country does not have any treaty to that effect,
the request will be rejected.

11
Section 166B of CrPC- Letter of a request from a country or place outside India
to a Court or an authority for investigation in India

This section of the CrPC provides for that if a letter of request is received from a
foreign country by India for the purpose of investigation in India which involves
examination of a person or production of any document, the Central Government may
forward the same to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate or
such Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate as he may appoint in this behalf,
who shall exercise his discretion and either shall summon the person before him and
record his statement or cause the document to be brought forward or send the letter to
any police officer for investigation, who shall then investigate into the offence in the
same manner, as if the offence had been committed within India. After the
investigation is completed all the pieces of evidence collected during such
investigation shall be forwarded by the Magistrate or police officer to the Central
Government for channelling such information to the Court or the authority issuing the
letter of request, in such manner as the Central Government may deem fit.

The Central Government can accept or reject the request based upon the extradition
treaty that India has with that particular country requesting for an investigation.

Section 188 – Offences committed outside India

Section 188 of the CrPC recites that when an offence is committed by a person
(whether citizen or not) outside India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere, or on
any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with regard to such offence as
if it had been committed at a place within India at which he may be found. For the
purpose of enquiry or trial for an offence, a sanction is required from the Central
Government. A person who commits a crime outside India but is subsequently found
in India, he may not fall within the purview of Section 188 of the Code.

The Central Government may refuse to extradite an offender if he has already been
tried in Indian court for an offense wanted for the same in a foreign country. The
government may also refuse to prosecute an offender already tried in a foreign
country for a particular offence.

12
PROCESS:

PROCEDURE UNDER CHAPTER II OF THE ACT: (NON -TREATY STATE)

The legal basis for Extradition with States with whom India does not have an Extradition
Treaty (non-Treaty States) is provided by Section 3(4) of the Indian Extradition Act, 1962,
which states that the Central Government may, by notified order, treat any convention to
which India and a foreign state are parties, as an Extradition Treaty made by India with that
foreign state providing for extradition in respect of the offences specified in that Convention.
India is also a party to the 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings. This also provides a legal basis for Extradition in Terror Crimes.4

In May 2011, the Indian Government ratified two UN Conventions – the United Nations
Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organised Crime (UNCTOC) and its three protocols.

PROCEDURE UNDER CHAPTER III OF THE ACT: (TREATY STATE)

the extradition request has to be in terms of the specific requirements therein. In terms of the
Comprehensive Guidelines for Investigation Abroad and Issue of Letters Rogatory (LRs)
issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, extradition requests are made only after the filing of
a charge sheet, cognisance of the same and issuance of an arrest warrant. If the accused is to
be arrested and produced in the courts of India, the requisite action is through the extradition
process.

Thus, after the Investigative Agency has filed the charge sheet, if the Magistrate takes
cognisance of the same, issuing orders/directions justifying the committal of the accused to
trial and seeking the presence of the accused to face trial, the request for extradition would be
made to the Ministry of External Affairs. In passing such a warrant for the apprehension of
the accused, the Magistrate will be governed by the considerations indicated hereinabove.

The request is in the form of a self-contained affidavit by the Magistrate, making out a prima
facie case against the accused. To make out a prima facie case, the affidavit is required to
provide brief facts and a history of the case with reference to the statements of witnesses and
relevant documentary evidence, provisions of law invoked and the description of the accused,

4
General Assembly resolution 45/116, Model Treaty on Extradition, A/RES/45/116 (14 December 1990), (15
Nov,2020 6:47 P.M) https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/model_treaty_extradition.pdf.

13
establishing his identity. It is necessary to specify the offences for which the accused is
charged and the provisions of law indicating the maximum sentence thereof.

The extradition request must contain an order of the Magistrate justifying the accused
person’s committal to trial on the basis of the evidence made available in the charge-sheet,
with directions seeking to secure the presence of the accused in Court to stand trial in the said
court from the country of present stay, along with a copy of the First Information Report
(FIR) duly counter-signed by the competent judicial authority. Such request must be
accompanied by an original and open-dated warrant of arrest stating clearly the offences for
which the accused has been charged and that the Court has taken cognisance of the said
sections.

An alleged offender may not be extradited to the requesting State in the absence of a treaty.
The States are not obligated to extradite aliens/nationals, or where the crime is not identified
as an extraditable offence in the treaty. Extradition may be denied for purely military and
political offences. Terrorist offences and violent crimes are excluded from the definition of
political offences for the purposes of extradition treaties. In cases where dual criminality
exists, where the conduct constituting the offence amounts to a criminal offence in both the
requesting country and the foreign country, the offence may be tried in either country
depending on factors such as territory where the offence was committed as well as the
nationality of the accused.

Procedure Of Extradition Request By India

The Ministry of External Affairs provides a list of documents which should be sent to a
foreign country in case of a provisional arrest; there should be a statement stating why the
request is urgent along with the information about the physical appearance of the person such
as his fingerprint, nationality, list of offences against him, location of the person to be
arrested and a description of prima facie evidence available against him along with then legal
provisions under which he’s charged and the penalty for it, then a statement of warrant of
arrest against that person and within how much time India will seek the person’s extradition
after his arrest. There’s Chapter IV of the Act which specifies the procedure to be followed
when a request for Extradition is made by India to a foreign state. If it’s a Non- treaty state
then a request has to be made by the Central Government for extradition either to the
diplomatic office of that country at New Delhi; or to the Government of that State or country
by a diplomatic representative of India in that State or requisition by the Central Government.

14
 Sec- 20 of the Extradition Act, 1962 provides that with the return of the fugitive criminal he
will be delivered to the proper authority (for instance, the Enforcement Directorate if the
offence is under the Prevention of the Money Laundering Act, 2002) but the principle of
double criminality will still be followed and the arrested fugitive would be tried & punished
only for those offences which are punishable in the foreign country.

While the criminal could only be punished for the offence which is mentioned in the treaty or
is agreed upon by the foreign state at the time of extradition or is an offence punishable by a
lesser imprisonment, i.e. of a less serious nature than the one mentioned in the application for
extradition.

Provisional Arrest Request In some urgent cases, where there’s a suspicion that a fugitive
criminal residing in a particular jurisdiction may flee, a country may request provisional
arrest of that fugitive, pendent lite the formal extradition litigation. An additional facility of
the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) may also be availed to transmit
a request, through the investigation agencies like the Central Bureau of India. For every
extradition request there are some pre requisite conditions.

Every extradition treaty specifies the documents required for a provisional arrest request and
also specifies the means by which a provisional arrest request must be made. The request is
prepared by the investigation agency (police for that matter). Mostly, the following
documents are required to be attached in a provisional arrest request when its sent to a foreign
country:

1. A cover statement which justifies the urgency of the request;

2. A physical description of the fugitive, his/her nationality, a photograph, fingerprints
(subject to availability), a list of the offences for which the arrest is sought;
3. Brief statement of the facts of the case/ the offences committed by the fugitive and the
available prima facie evidence for his incrimination;

The request should be in a form befitting presentation to a foreign Government on behalf of

the Government of India. The request is presented through a dossier before, the request there
has to be a cover letter on an A4 size white paper While the documents inside it should be
printed on one side of the paper only (not front and back), a dossier should begin with proper
15
index page mentioning about the details of the documents, documents should be clearly typed
and free form any errors of spelling or printing mistakes and it shall carry the signatures of
the concerned official should be affixed with a stamp without any smudging.

After the dossier is completed three identical photocopies of the original dossier are required
to be enclosed with the covering letter. The copies should be prepared after completion of the
dossier and need not be signed or stamped again. Contain a note indicating correctness of the
request and contents of the dossier. After the completion ths dossier shall be addressed to
Joint Secretary (CPV Division), Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, accompanied by
one original and 3 (three) identical photocopies of the dossier. Also a soft copy of the same
may be forwarded to Joint Secretary of the Consular, Passports and Visa Division (CPV),
Joint Secretary (Internal Security-II) Ministry of Home Affairs, and Narcotics Control
Bureau.

V. EXTRADITION & INTERPOL

International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) is an international organization to

facilitate international police cooperation, presently fugitives pose a grave threat to public
safety worldwide. They are mobile (often changing countries on fraudulent travel
documents), and opportunistic. Fugitives are a challenge to the world’s criminal justice
systems. Its an irony that they may be charged with an offence but could not be arrested.

Even though, they have been released on bail they abscond in order to avoid prosecution.
When fugitives flee, cases are not adjudicated, convicted criminals fail to meet their
obligations, and crime victims are denied justice. INTERPOL provides a diverse systematic
assistance to the member countries for locating and arresting fugitives who cross international
boundaries to flee justice. The Red Notice of the organization is very instrumental in
detecting the fugitive criminal and ensuring his return to the foreign country.

Issuance of Notices through Interpol:

The Interpol is the international organisation which assists and works in coordination with the
police forces of its 192 member countries, by extending mutual assistance and cooperation in
order to identify, capture and ensure the surrender/delivery of wanted fugitive criminals or

16
missing persons. In India, the Central Bureau of Investigation ("CBI") has been designated
as the National Central Bureau of India.

The Interpol issues various types of notices to alert as well as seek important information
from the police of its member countries. However, the notices relevant from the purpose of
extradition are Red Notices and Blue Notices. For extradition purposes, Red Notices 5 (also
known as Red Corner Notices) contain a request for arrest of the fugitive criminal with a
view to subsequently extradite him/her to the country where he/she is wanted. The primary
objective of the Red Notice is to immobilize the fugitive criminal in the country where he/she
is residing, whether permanently or temporarily, by ensuring his/her arrest by the local police,
subsequent to which a formal request for his/her extradition is made to the said country by the
country seeking extradition therefrom. Sometimes, the police may use a Blue Notice to track
the fugitive criminal till such time he/she is in a country with which India has favourable
extradition treaty and good diplomatic relations, and thereupon it may seek issuance of a Red
Notice followed by extradition request to such country. 

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of
Maharashtra, has held Red Notices to be de facto international arrest warrants.

It is relevant to note that Red Notices can only be issued by Interpol after an arrest warrant
has been issued by the court in the requesting country against the fugitive criminal named in
the Notice. Furthermore, since Red Notices are precursors to a request for "extradition", if an
extradition request cannot eventually be successful, the Red Notice may become infructuous
(as the objective of extradition request would be trial of the fugitive criminal in the requesting
country in accordance with the treaty provisions). However, a defence can be raised by the
police/court in favour of the Red Notice, if location of the fugitive criminal is unknown.

An alleged offender may not be extradited to the requesting state in the following cases:

 No treaty – In absence of a treaty, States are not obligated to extradite aliens/nationals

 No treaty crime – Extradition is generally limited to crimes identified in the treaty
which may vary in relation to one State from another, as provided by the treaty.

5
M. Basheer Hussain, ‘India: Keeping to the Rule of Law Certain Aspects of Extradition Treaties’ (Asian
Human Rights Commission) <http://ahrck.net>

17
 Military and Political Offences – Extradition may be denied for purely military and
political offences. Terrorist offences and violent crimes are excluded from the
definition of political offences for the purposes of extradition treaties.
 Want of Dual Criminality – Dual criminality exists when conduct constituting the
offence amounts to a criminal offence in both India and the foreign country.
 Procedural considerations – Extradition may be denied when due procedure as
required by the Extradition Act of 1962 is not followed..

VI. SUCCESSFUL EXTRADITION CASES

 Extradition of Abu Saleem
History:
When Abu Salem entered the US, they tipped off the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), which tailed him. Abu managed to get out of the US and entered Portugal
through Lisbon after rigging up his papers. They went on to tip the Lisbon authorities
that immediately seized the
Indian gangster. And, the tables turned. Abu Salem found himself on the receiving
end and, the Mumbai police, on their part had, scores to settle with the gangster whose
extradition from
Portugal is shrouded with as much controversy as his role in the city’s blackest blasts.
The extradition of underworld don Abu Salem was a tribute to the co-ordination
among the Central Bureau of Investigation, the ministry of home affairs, the ministry
of external affairs and the Indian embassy in Lisbon, Portugal, and was made possible
by the excellent co-operation received from the Portuguese authorities. The
extradition was a landmark event for many reasons.
Process:
There is no extradition treaty between India and Portugal. The absence of such a
treaty initially created legal difficulties. Therefore this becomes an area where
political considerations play a prominent role, unless there is an applicable bilateral
extradition treaty.
Indeed, a country does not need a treaty to decide that a fugitive found within its
jurisdiction should be extradited to another country that requests extradition. It can, if

18
 it wants to, take that decision without any treaty obligations whatsoever, even by
exercise of executive discretion.6
Where there is a bilateral extradition treaty, the states party to it normally goes by its
terms. The process of extradition usually involves interposition of the Judiciary in
both countries, and this has permitted the emergence of some discernible principles of
international law governing extradition.
Indian government sought his extradition under the United Nations Convention on
Suppression of Terrorism of 2000 under which all member nations have to help each
other in the war against terrorism. Portugal and India are both signatories to the
Convention. In the meantime, the Portuguese court sentenced Salem and his girlfriend
Monica Bedi to four years imprisonment for illegally entering and staying in Portugal
on forged passports. The court also ordered that their extradition could be made only
after they have completed their prison term. When the CBI got to know of Salem’s
plea the Portuguese lawyer representing the Indian government rushed to the court to
remind the judge about his previous order about extraditing the duo on completing
their 4-year sentence.
 Extradition of Chhota Rajan
History:
Rajendra Sadashiv Nikalje (born 5 December 1959),popularly known by his moniker
Chhota Rajan, is an Indian criminal and mobster who served as the boss of a major
crime syndicate based in Mumbai. He is currently serving a life sentence at Tihar Jail
in New Delhi.
He joined the Bada Rajan gang in 1982. After Bada Rajan was shot dead, Chhota
Rajan took over the gang and worked for Dawood Ibrahim who had fled to Dubai.
During the Arun Gawli – Dawood gang war in the late eighties, Rajan escaped to
Dubai in 1989 and eventually rose to be the right hand of Dawood Ibrahim before
splitting with him in 1993 and forming an independent gang that frequently clashed
with Dawood's D-Company. He is wanted for many criminal cases that include
extortion, murder, smuggling and drug trafficking. He is also wanted in 70 murder
cases and several more attempted murders.
Process:

6
Perry, G.C. The Four Major Western Approaches To The Political Offense Exception To Extradition: From
Inception To Modern Terrorism, 40 Mercer L. Rev. 709

19
 Rajan was arrested in Bali by Indonesian police on 25 October 2015. He was
extradited to India on 6 November after 27 years on the run and is currently awaiting
trials for ongoing cases in custody. On 2 May 2018 he was convicted of murder of a
journalist and handed life imprisonment
 Extradition of Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar
History:
Bhullar was named as an accused along with three others in a 1993 car bomb blast
outside the Youth Congress office in the capital, in which nine persons were killed
and 30 others injured.
Process:
He was arrested at Frankfurt airport in 1995 on charges of travelling on a fake
passport and was deported back to India. A local Frankfurt court had declared his
deportation illegal in 1997.
A special court in the capital had held him guilty under the then controversial anti
terror law law - TADA (Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act) in 2001,
which was upheld by a majority 2:1 verdict by the Supreme Court a year later.
The Supreme Court of India commuted his death sentence to life Imprisonment on 31
March 2014, both on the ground of an unexplained and inordinate delay of eight years
in deciding his mercy petition and on the ground of mental illness.
In a top level contact with India, the German government had informed it would not
have deported death row convict Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar from Frankfurt in 1995,
had it known that he would be punished with the death penalty .

20
 VII. UNSUCCESSFUL EXTRADITION CASES

 Extradition of Vijay Mallaya

History:
Vijay Mallya is an Indian businessman at present fighting extradition from the UK.
Mallya, who owes 17 Indian banks an estimated Rs 9,000 crore, is accused of fraud
and money laundering in the country.
Mallya inherited UB Spirits, known for the Kingfisher beer brand, from his father and
turned it around into India’s biggest spirits maker. He became the chairman of UB
Group at the age of 28.
However, most other businesses of the group were not as successful, Kingfisher
Airlines being the biggest failure.
Started in 2005, Kingfisher Airlines was grounded in 2012 after a burgeoning debt
burden made it impossible for the beleaguered airline to continue operations. The
airline is also being investigated for suspected diversion of funds and financial
irregularities.
Mallya left the country on March 2, 2016, the day a clutch of public-sector banks
moved the Debt Recovery Tribunal 7 against him. In January 2019, he was declared a
fugitive economic offender under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.
Process:
The Indian government is making all efforts to extradite Mallya from the UK. In
February 2019, UK Home Secretary approved the extradition. The case is now

7
The Queen of the Application of Vijay Mallya vs Government of India & Ors [2019] EWHC 1849 (Admin)

21
 pending in the London High Court, where Mallya filed an appeal against the order.
The appeal has been listed for a three-day hearing from February 11, 2020.
Sanjeev Chawla Case:
History:
The GOI issued an extradition request dated 1 February 2016 seeking the extradition
of Mr. Sanjeev Chawla for allegedly acting as a conduit between bookies who wanted
to fix cricket matches and Hansie Cronje, the then captain of the South African test
cricket team. It was the GOI's case that Mr. Sanjeev Chawla's conduct amounted to
the offence of cheating under the Indian Penal Code ("IPC") and the nominal UK
offence of 'conspiracy to give or agree to give corrupt payments in England and
Wales".

One of the primary issues involved in this matter was the prison conditions of the
Tihar Jail, New Delhi and whether the same would be a bar to Mr. Chawla's
extradition as not being compatible with his right guaranteed by Article 3 of the
Convention rights i.e. prohibition of torture and degrading treatment, as contended by
Mr. Chawla. This objection was based on a report of Dr. Alan Mitchell on prison
conditions, which contained findings of overcrowding, violence and lack of medical
facilities. In response to this objection, the GOI provided two letters of assurance
regarding the prison conditions.
Process:
The Magistrate Court only considered the first letter of assurance and decided that the
same was inadequate as it was in general terms, and that the evidence established that
there was a real risk of inhuman and degrading treatment to Mr. Chawla, which would
violate his human rights. Therefore, the Court discharged Mr. Chawla. The GOI
appealed the decision to the High Court. The High Court considered the second letter
of assurance. However, it concluded that both the letters of assurance were inadequate
and therefore "that there remains a real risk that if Mr Chawla is extradited and held at
Tihar prison that he will be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to
article 3 of the ECHR". However, the High Court indicated that the GOI may rectify
the situation by providing a more suitable assurance.8
The GOI subsequently filed a third letter of assurance which, amongst other things,
gave specific assurances that Mr. Chawla would be accommodated in a cell to be
8
[2018] EWHC 1050 (Admin)

22
 occupied exclusively by him, the ward where he would be lodged had inmates who
had not violated any prison rules and were of satisfactory conduct and Mr. Chawla
would be provided immediate medical attention if required, during his stay in the
Delhi prisons. The High Court held that the information available about Tihar prisons
and the terms of the third assurance were sufficient to show that there would be no
real risk that Mr. Chawla would be subjected to impermissible treatment.
Consequently, the High Court quashed the Magistrate Court's order discharging Mr.
Chawla and directed the Magistrate Court to proceed as if Mr. Chawla had not been
discharged.20

Subsequently, the Magistrate Court sent the case to the Secretary of State for his
decision. The Secretary of State approved the extradition. Mr. Chawla's application
seeking leave to appeal was rejected by the High Court. After an attempt to move the
European Court of Human Rights by Mr. Chawla failed, he was extradited to India in
February 2020.
 Bofors Case
History:
The Bofors chargesheet filed in 1999 by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
had named Quattrocchi, who was close to the Gandhi family during his days in India
as the representative of an Italian firm, as one of the accused in the case regarding the
₹ 64 crore payoffs for supply of Swedish Howitzer guns to the Indian Army. The ₹
1,600 crore contract was clinched in 1986.
Quattrochi left India in 1993 to avoid being arrested. The CBI had unsuccessfully
tried to extradite Quattrocchi to India but it lost two extradition appeals, first in
Malaysia in 2002, and then in Argentina in 2007. An application for withdrawal of the
case against Quattrocchi was filed by the public prosecutor on 3 October 2009. But on
4 March 2011, a Delhi court discharged Quattrocchi from the payoffs case after
allowing the CBI to withdraw prosecution against him, bringing to an end a major
chapter in the 25-year-old Bofors saga.
On 12 July 2013, Quattrochi died of a heart attack in Milan.

Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance:

India has recently promulgated the Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance, 2018
("Ordinance") on April 21, 2018, which allows initiation of various actions against "fugitive

23
economic offender", who flees the country after defaulting on multi-crore bank loans and
similar instances of fraud. "Fugitive economic offender" is an individual against whom an
arrest warrant relating to a scheduled offence has been issued by any court in India, who have
left India so as to avoid criminal prosecution, or being abroad, refuse to return to India to face
criminal prosecution. Schedule offence means an offence specified under the schedule to the
Ordinance, if the total value involved in such offence(s) is Rs. 100 crores or more. Under the
Ordinance, certain authorized officers can file an application in the special court for declaring
such persons as fugitive economic offenders. The aforesaid officer can also, with the
permission of the special court, provisionally order attachment of such persons' properties,
even prior to filing aforesaid application provided the same is filed within 30 days from the
attachment date. Such authorized officers have also been empowered to conduct survey and
inspection, search and seizure of the offender's properties. Once the accused are declared as
fugitive economic offenders, the special court has the power to order confiscation of their
proceeds of crimes and properties in India as well as abroad by the Indian Government.

Taking advantage of the wide ambit of powers conferred under the Ordinance, the Indian
Enforcement Directorate is reportedly considering to take action against Vijay Mallya, Nirav
Modi and Mehul Choksi including to confiscate their assets.

24
 VIII. CONCLUSION

Despite the extensive statutory framework and working machinery in place to extradite
persons from abroad into India, only 65 fugitives have been extradited to India since the year
20025 and it is evident that the surrender process is quite cumbersome and tedious, often
taking years to complete and, in some cases, they even remain unsuccessful. Needless to say,
it enables the fugitive criminals accused of offences in India, to evade arrest and prosecution
for years on end. The Ordinance is a step in the right direction but the long term benefits of
the Ordinance and its ability to encourage the foreign States to extend cooperation to India to
expedite the extradition process remains to be seen.

Hence, Section 34 C of the Indian Extradition Act, 1962, will be applicable which states that
"notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, where a
fugitive criminal, who has committed an extradition offence punishable with death in India, is
surrendered or returned by a foreign State on the request of the Central government."

And therefore the laws of that foreign state do not provide for the death penalty for such an
offence, such fugitive criminal shall be liable for punishment for life only for that offence.
Extradition has been defined by Oppenheim as "the delivery of an accused or a convicted
individual to the State on whose territory he is alleged to have committed, or to have been
convicted of, a crime by the State on whose territory the alleged criminal happens for the
time to be." The right to demand extradition and the duty to surrender an alleged criminal to
the demanding State is created by a treaty.

25
As the question of surrendering an alleged criminal to the demanding State always involves
the question of human rights, therefore the essence of maintaining the sanctity of the
agreement (that Salem shall not be awarded death penalty) shall be attributed to the concept
of human rights involved in extradition laws, which lays emphasis on the law of the country
in which the offender seems to be at the time of extradition.

REFERENCES:

Books:

1. P. Ramanatha Aiyar‟s Concise Law Dictionary, Lexis Nexis, Fifth Edition

2. Black‘s Law Dictionary, Centennial Edition (1891-1991), Sixth Edition
3. J.G. Starke, Introduction to International Law, Tenth Edition

Statutes:

1. The Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881

2. The Constitution of India, 1950
3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860
4. The Explosive Substances Act, 1908
5. The Extradition Act, 1903
6. The Extradition Act, 1962
7. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

26
27
28
29