LONDON: A British court currently hearing the extradition case of embattled liquor baron Vijay Mallya has rejected two extradition requests by the Indian authorities in recent weeks.
Judges at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London ruled in favour of UK-based alleged bookie Sanjeev Kumar Chawla on October 16 and in addition discharged a fraud case towards a British Indian couple, Jatinder and Asha Rani Angurala, on October 12.
The rulings come just weeks ahead of the extradition case towards Mallya, sought after in India on loan defaults to several banks amounting to about Rs 9,000-crore, comes up for its subsequent case management hearing on November 20 to resolve the process the extradition trial scheduled to start out on December four.
The case towards Chawla, the key accused within the cricket match-fixing scandal involving former South African captain Hanse Cronje in 2000, used to be discharged by district judge Rebecca Crane on human rights grounds over severe prerequisites in Tihar Jail in Delhi the place he used to be to be hung on being extradited.
The judge mentioned she used to be happy there used to be a prima facie case towards Chawla over his function within the solving of "cricket matches played between India and South Africa during the tour of the South African Cricket Team to India under the captainship of Hansie Cronje in February-March 2000".
However, on hearing knowledgeable proof from Dr Alan Mitchell, a licenced scientific practitioner and a former scientific officer at a Scottish prison, she ruled in favour of Chawla at the grounds that his human rights could be violated in Tihar Jail below Section 87, Article 3 with regards to "prohibition of torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment".
"(There are) strong grounds for believing that the RP (Requested Person: Chawla) would be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the Tihar prison complex, due to the overcrowding, lack of medical provision, risk of being subjected to torture and violence either from other inmates or prison staff which is endemic in Tihar," Judge Crane famous in her judgment.
In the case of the Anguralas, senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot - also presiding over the Mallya case - ruled that it might be unjust to extradite them after just about 1 / 4 of a century for the reason that fraud used to be imagined to have taken position when Jatinder used to be a branch supervisor at the Bank of India in Jalandhar.
The Anguralas had been sought after for fraud relationship again to between 1990 and 1993 towards the general public sector financial institution, causing a complete lack of about 24,000 kilos.
Jatinder Angurala used to be accused of fraudulently sanctioning and paying out loans to himself, his wife and co-conspirators throughout that duration. He later admitted irregularities and promised to repay the financial institution and deposited some money but didn't repay the entire money taken.
The couple, who at the moment are British voters, had been arrested on an extradition warrant in June 2015 at a shop owned by them in south-east London and remanded on conditional bail. The judge used to be vital of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for considerable delays within the case and for failure to arrest the accused years in the past regardless of being acutely aware of a chain of addresses associated with them.
"I find I am not sure he is a fugitive and his extradition is barred by reason of passage of time as I find it would be unjust and oppressive to extradite him by reason of the quarter century that has passed since the alleged offence," Judge Arbuthnot mentioned in reference to Jatinder.
"He is aged 69, not in the first flush of youth, he has minor health issues... it is just too late and it would be wrong to extradite him now," she notes.
In relation to his wife's extradition, she ruled that "there will be prejudice and oppression" had been she to be extradited and barred her extradition by reason why of the passage of time as well.
India and the United Kingdom have an Extradition Treaty, signed in 1992 and in pressure since November 1993, below which Bangladeshi national Mohammad Abdul Shakur sought after in the United Kingdom on homicide charges used to be to be extradited from India maximum recently.
Besides Mallya, there at the moment are 5 Indian extradition requests pending in UK courts involving fugitives Rajesh Kapoor, Tiger Hanif, Atul Singh, Raj Kumar Patel and Shaik Sadiq, in line with a central authority remark made within the Rajya Sabha earlier this yr.
Judges at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London ruled in favour of UK-based alleged bookie Sanjeev Kumar Chawla on October 16 and in addition discharged a fraud case towards a British Indian couple, Jatinder and Asha Rani Angurala, on October 12.
The rulings come just weeks ahead of the extradition case towards Mallya, sought after in India on loan defaults to several banks amounting to about Rs 9,000-crore, comes up for its subsequent case management hearing on November 20 to resolve the process the extradition trial scheduled to start out on December four.
The case towards Chawla, the key accused within the cricket match-fixing scandal involving former South African captain Hanse Cronje in 2000, used to be discharged by district judge Rebecca Crane on human rights grounds over severe prerequisites in Tihar Jail in Delhi the place he used to be to be hung on being extradited.
The judge mentioned she used to be happy there used to be a prima facie case towards Chawla over his function within the solving of "cricket matches played between India and South Africa during the tour of the South African Cricket Team to India under the captainship of Hansie Cronje in February-March 2000".
However, on hearing knowledgeable proof from Dr Alan Mitchell, a licenced scientific practitioner and a former scientific officer at a Scottish prison, she ruled in favour of Chawla at the grounds that his human rights could be violated in Tihar Jail below Section 87, Article 3 with regards to "prohibition of torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment".
"(There are) strong grounds for believing that the RP (Requested Person: Chawla) would be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the Tihar prison complex, due to the overcrowding, lack of medical provision, risk of being subjected to torture and violence either from other inmates or prison staff which is endemic in Tihar," Judge Crane famous in her judgment.
In the case of the Anguralas, senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot - also presiding over the Mallya case - ruled that it might be unjust to extradite them after just about 1 / 4 of a century for the reason that fraud used to be imagined to have taken position when Jatinder used to be a branch supervisor at the Bank of India in Jalandhar.
The Anguralas had been sought after for fraud relationship again to between 1990 and 1993 towards the general public sector financial institution, causing a complete lack of about 24,000 kilos.
Jatinder Angurala used to be accused of fraudulently sanctioning and paying out loans to himself, his wife and co-conspirators throughout that duration. He later admitted irregularities and promised to repay the financial institution and deposited some money but didn't repay the entire money taken.
The couple, who at the moment are British voters, had been arrested on an extradition warrant in June 2015 at a shop owned by them in south-east London and remanded on conditional bail. The judge used to be vital of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for considerable delays within the case and for failure to arrest the accused years in the past regardless of being acutely aware of a chain of addresses associated with them.
"I find I am not sure he is a fugitive and his extradition is barred by reason of passage of time as I find it would be unjust and oppressive to extradite him by reason of the quarter century that has passed since the alleged offence," Judge Arbuthnot mentioned in reference to Jatinder.
"He is aged 69, not in the first flush of youth, he has minor health issues... it is just too late and it would be wrong to extradite him now," she notes.
In relation to his wife's extradition, she ruled that "there will be prejudice and oppression" had been she to be extradited and barred her extradition by reason why of the passage of time as well.
India and the United Kingdom have an Extradition Treaty, signed in 1992 and in pressure since November 1993, below which Bangladeshi national Mohammad Abdul Shakur sought after in the United Kingdom on homicide charges used to be to be extradited from India maximum recently.
Besides Mallya, there at the moment are 5 Indian extradition requests pending in UK courts involving fugitives Rajesh Kapoor, Tiger Hanif, Atul Singh, Raj Kumar Patel and Shaik Sadiq, in line with a central authority remark made within the Rajya Sabha earlier this yr.
UK rejects two Indian extradition requests
![UK rejects two Indian extradition requests]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
November 05, 2017
Rating:
