Indian Fugitives in the UK and Extradition Law: Challenges and Implications

Introduction:
In recent years, there has been concern and discussion surrounding the issue of Indian
fugitives seeking refuge in the UK. Like many other nations, India has been striving to bring
these fugitives back to face trial for their alleged crimes. However, the extradition process
between India and the UK has faced several challenges, which frequently resulted in complex
legal battles and diplomatic negotiations. This article delves into the key aspects of Indian
fugitives in the UK and the extradition law of India, examining the difficulties encountered
and the ramifications for both nations.
Understanding Extradition:
Extradition is a legal process through which a person accused or convicted of a crime in one
country is transferred to another country to face trial or serve a sentence. It is a crucial tool
for preventing transnational crime and upholding justice. India and the UK have an
extradition treaty in place, signed in 1992, which serves as the basis for extradition requests
between the two nations.
Extradition involves a series of steps, including a formal request by the requesting country
(India) to the requested country (the UK), a review and evaluation of the request by the
requested country's authorities, and legal proceedings to determine the eligibility and validity
of the extradition. The process involves coordination between both countries' law
enforcement agencies, courts, and diplomatic channels.
Notable Indian Fugitives in the UK:
Significant media attention has been drawn to a number of high-profile instances of Indian
fugitives finding sanctuary in the UK. Examples include people who are accused of severe
financial fraud and money laundering in India, such as Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, and Mehul
Choksi. Extensive legal actions and extradition attempts by Indian authorities have been
sparked by their presence in the UK.
Vijay Mallya, the former chairman of Kingfisher Airlines, is wanted in India for financial
irregularities. He fled to the United Kingdom in March 2016 and is wanted in India over a
default of Rs 9,000 crore that was loaned to Kingfisher Airlines (KFA) by several banks1.
Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi are diamond merchants accused of involvement in the Punjab
National Bank scam, one of the largest banking frauds in Indian history. Pulling off one of
the biggest bank frauds in the country, fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi and his uncle Mehul

1
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/sc-dismisses-vijay-mallyas-plea-against-bid-to-declare-
him-fugitive-economic-offender/articleshow/98387212.cms
Choksi created a complex web of deception through fraudulent Letters of Undertaking
(LoUs) to siphon off ₹ 14,000 crores from state-owned Punjab National Bank in connivance
with some bank officials2. Their extradition cases have been closely watched due to the
magnitude of the alleged crimes and the significant financial impact on India's economy.
Challenges in the Extradition Process:
The extradition process between India and the UK is often complicated due to various
challenges. The disparities in the legal systems of the two nations represent one of the major
obstacles. India operates under a common law system, while the UK follows a legal
framework rooted in common law and statutes. These differences can make it tricky to figure
out the legal requirements for extradition.
Legal experts involved in the extradition process must carefully analyse and understand the
impact of differences in legal systems. These variations can affect the interpretation and
application of important legal concepts, including the admissibility of evidence, the scope of
offences, and the protection of individual rights. Due to these legal complexities, extradition
proceedings may face prolonged legal battles and delays.
In addition, the issue of human rights arises during extradition cases, as both countries need
to ensure the protection of the rights of the individuals involved. Requests for extradition may
come under scrutiny regarding the assurance of a fair trial, the conditions of imprisonment,
and the possibility of inhumane treatment or torture. These considerations typically become
the central points of legal disputes and diplomatic negotiations between India and the UK.
As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights 3 (ECHR), the UK has to
comply with the restrictions imposed on extraditions in cases where there is a possibility of
torture or inhumane treatment. Fugitives often use human rights arguments to resist
extradition, highlighting inadequacies in the legal system or prison conditions of the
requesting country. Authorities must tread carefully to address these concerns while ensuring
the maintenance of the integrity of the extradition process.
Furthermore, political implications can impact the process of extraditing a fugitive. The
decision to extradite may be influenced by a variety of factors such as diplomatic relations
between the countries involved, public opinion, and political considerations within the
country. Political pressures and public sentiment may influence the stance of the requested
country's government, adding complexity to extradition proceedings.

2
How Nirav Modi Cheated Punjab National Bank Of Rs 14,000 Crore <https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/how-
nirav-modi-cheated-punjab-national-bank-of-rs-14-000-crore-3505954>
3
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
Moreover, the burden of proof required to extradite a fugitive can be quite challenging.
Indian authorities must provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the guilt of the fugitive in
question, meeting the standards outlined in the UK legal system. This requirement demands a
thorough and persuasive case, which can be both time-consuming and resource incentive.
Additionally, the evidentiary requirements may differ between the two legal systems, leading
to further legal complications.
Legal Reforms and Improvements:
To address the challenges faced in extradition cases, India has taken measures to streamline
its legal framework. The Indian government has been working on amendments to its
extradition law to simplify and expedite the process. The aim is to ensure that the legal
system is better equipped to handle extradition requests and overcome hurdles that impede
successful outcomes. The focus is to enhance cooperation between India and the UK, making
the extradition process more efficient and effective.
The Extradition Act of 1962, which is the primary legislation governing extradition in India,
is being amended to align with international standards and address procedural and legal
complexities. The proposed amendments endeavour to vitalize the legal framework by
providing clarity on extradition procedures, evidence requirements, and the protection of
individual rights.
Furthermore, initiatives are underway to strengthen international cooperation in fighting
financial crimes and corruption. This is being achieved through international agreements and
forums that provide platforms for collaboration and information-sharing, facilitating the
extradition process and the apprehension of fugitives. Continued efforts to enhance legal
frameworks and foster cooperation are of the utmost importance for achieving positive
outcomes in extradition cases.
The UK, on its part, has also shown commitment to improving its extradition system. The UK
government has introduced measures to expedite the process and reduce the backlog of cases.
It has established dedicated extradition courts and specialized units to handle extradition
matters more efficiently. These steps demonstrate the UK's recognition of the importance of
extradition in maintaining the rule of law and combating transnational crime.
Implications for India and the UK:
The presence of Indian fugitives in the UK has consequences for both countries. India views
it as essential to bring these fugitives back to face trial, to ensure accountability and to send a
strong message against financial fraud and corruption. Successful extraditions not only serve
justice but also demonstrate India's commitment to fighting transnational crimes.
Additionally, repatriating fugitives helps recover stolen assets, which benefits the Indian
economy.
For the UK, handling extradition cases in a proper manner strengthens diplomatic ties with
India and reaffirms its commitment to international cooperation in fighting cross-border
crime. By upholding principles of justice and supporting the extradition of individuals
accused of serious offences, the UK establishes itself as a responsible global partner in the
fight against crime and corruption.
Conclusion:
The issue of Indian fugitives seeking asylum in the UK and the difficulties of the extradition
process present a significant challenge for both countries. In order to successfully extradite
these individuals, a delicate balance between legal considerations, diplomatic negotiations,
and political will must be struck. It is imperative that both India and the UK continue to
cooperate, implement legal reforms, and improve extradition mechanisms to ensure that
justice is served, fugitives are held accountable, and bilateral relations remain strong in the
face of transnational criminal activities.
By addressing the challenges and implications associated with Indian fugitives in the UK,
both nations can work together towards a more robust and effective extradition process that
upholds the rule of law and promotes international cooperation. Through collaboration, legal
reforms, and adherence to human rights standards, India and the UK can strengthen their
bilateral relations, build trust, and collectively combat transnational crime for the benefit of
their respective countries and citizens.