E-Paper
Belgium's top court rejects fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi's appeal against extradition
The extradition plea was filed against the Antwerp court of appeals' order, which was given on the basis of a request from the CBI.
Prefer HTon Google
Belgium’s top court has rejected fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi’s appeal against his arrest in Antwerp based on an extradition request by New Delhi, people familiar with the development said on Tuesday.
The Belgian Court of Cassation (equivalent of India’s Supreme Court) heard Choksi’s plea on Tuesday at Brussels and ruled in India’s favour. “The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal (of Choksi). So, the decision of the Court of Appeal stands,” Henri Vanderlinden, advocate general at Brussels, told HT in an email on Tuesday.
Officials said the Belgian top court has upheld the decision of an Antwerp court of appeals, which rejected the fugitive’s contention on October 17 that he runs the risk of being tortured if sent to India.
ALSO READ | PNB fraud: Court clears auction of several properties of Mehul Choksi’s Gitanjali Gems
Officials familiar with the development said it was a positive step for the Indian government and that a formal process in Belgian courts for Choksi’s extradition may now begin.
Choksi, 65, who is being held in a prison in Antwerp following his arrest on April 11 at India’s request, moved the Belgian Court of Cassation on October 30. Indian investigators have accused Choksi of six bank frauds between 2018 and 2022 involving amounts totalling nearly ₹13,000 crore.
In its October 17 ruling, the Antwerp court of appeals dismissed Choksi’s challenge to his arrest on India’s extradition request, holding that Choksi was neither the subject of a “political trial” nor did he run the risk of torture or denial of justice in India. It also dismissed the fugitive’s argument that he was abducted in Antigua and Barbuda at the behest of Indian authorities in May 2021.
ALSO READ | Mehul Choksi not a subject of political trial in India: Belgian court
The four-member Chamber of Accusation (or Charging) at Antwerp’s court of appeals said in the October verdict that two arrest warrants issued by Indian courts -- on May 23, 2018 and June 15, 2021 on the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) requests --- were “enforceable” on the charges pertaining to criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, fraud, embezzlement and criminal misconduct.
The court said these offences carry a minimum prison sentence of one year in both India and Belgium in line with the principle of reciprocity in the extradition law.
Citing the 2022 decision of Interpol’s internal body, Commission for the Control of Interpol Files’ (CCF) to remove his red notice and various other documents, Choksi had previously claimed that he was abducted in Antigua on the instructions of the Indian government.
However, the court in Antwerp observed: “It cannot be inferred from the documents supplied by the person (Choksi) concerned that he was kidnapped in Antigua on the instructions of the Indian authorities. The decision of the CCF of 12 October 2022 is inconclusive and very cautious and worded in a conditional manner.”
ALSO READ | Mehul Choksi’s foreign citizenship still disputed, India tells Belgian govt
Choksi’s extradition has been sought under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 120 B (criminal conspiracy), 201 (destruction of evidence), 409 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 477A (falsification of accounts), and sections 7 and 13 (bribery) of the Prevention of Corruption Act; which are crimes in Belgium as well under the dual criminality clause of the extradition treaty.
The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) and United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) were also invoked in the extradition request.
The Indian government also assured Belgium that Choksi, if extradited to India, would be held at Barrack no 12 at Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai, which conforms to the European CPT (Committee for Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment), and that he would be provided all facilities, including clean drinking water, adequate food and medical facilities, access to newspapers and TV, choice of treatment from a private doctor and will not face solitary confinement.
