E-Paper
Who is Viktoriia Basu? Russian woman accused of fleeing India with her minor son
Viktoriia Basu first arrived in India in 2019 and later approached the courts in 2023 seeking full custody of her child after her marriage broke down.
Viktoriia Basu, the Russian woman at the centre of a growing international custody dispute, has become the focus of both Indian and Russian authorities after she allegedly fled India with her minor son in violation of a Supreme Court order.
Basu first arrived in India in 2019 and later approached the courts in 2023 seeking full custody of her child after her marriage broke down.
With reconciliation attempts failing, the Supreme Court in May allowed a shared-custody arrangement, granting each parent three days a week with the child, extending Basu’s visa and directing Delhi Police to keep her residence under watch.
(Also Read: Russian embassy denies role in aiding woman’s escape with minor son)
How she fled India
However, on July 7, her husband informed the court that she had disappeared with the child, triggering a search by law enforcement and intervention by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA).
What the Russian embassy says
The case took a diplomatic turn when the Delhi Police told the Supreme Court that two Russian embassy officials, Albert Shtoda and Arthur Gerbst, were allegedly involved in arranging the vehicle that transported Basu from Delhi to the Indo-Nepal border in Bihar, from where she travelled onward to Russia via Sharjah.
The police said their investigation had yielded “clear evidence” of this facilitation. But the Russian embassy has firmly denied any role in Basu’s escape.
In a communication to MEA, placed before the court in a status report, the embassy said counsellor Arthur Gerbst had only asked a taxi operator to arrange a vehicle on behalf of Basu’s mother, Olga Zhigalina, and insisted that no official car, nor any embassy resources, had been used for the Basu family. It called the allegations “factually incorrect” and rejected claims that embassy officers had helped Basu evade Indian authorities.
Delhi Police, however, disputed the embassy’s clarification, telling the court that the information provided was inaccurate. On November 24, they sent a fresh request through MEA seeking details about the roles of the two named officials and asking for clarity on their diplomatic immunity.
This followed earlier criticism from the Supreme Court over why investigators had not sought custodial interrogation of the embassy officers or issued a Red Corner Notice for Basu.
In its latest report, the police informed the court that an RCN has now been initiated, and that a request for custodial questioning of the officials was already sent to MEA on November 11.
MEA, in its affidavit, acknowledged the embassy’s position and stated that Russia maintains the officers had no involvement in the alleged abduction and that the accusations “have no legal ground.” Nevertheless, the ministry has formally asked the Russian embassy to waive diplomatic immunity for both officials under Article 32 of the Vienna Convention to enable a deeper investigation. India has also reached out to the prosecutor general of Russia under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) seeking information on the current whereabouts of Basu and her son.
(With inputs from HT correspondents)
