Libertatem Magazine

Delhi HC: Cannot Arrest Accused Until a Request for Extradition Is Merited

Contents of this Page

The order has come in a writ petition filed by Vinay Mittal (the Petitioner). He has been charge-sheeted in seven separate cases of siphoning of funds by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The plea claims that the arrest of the Petitioner in the other six cases is illegal. And since he got extradited only in one matter, he couldn’t face prosecution in other cases against him.

Facts of the case

The Petitioner claims that he was an employee of Mr. Bharat Rana Chaudhary, and has been falsely implicated by CBI. The CBI alleges that the petitioner was a proprietor of two firms-M/s Krishna & Krishna Enterprises and M/s Mittal Metals. The petitioner used bank accounts of these firms to siphon off funds from the banks. It is alleged that the total amount of funds involved in the seven cases is approximately ₹4319.56 lacs. After completion of the investigation, Mr. Mittal was arrested in 2014. But during the course of the trial, petitioner escaped from the country to avoid arrest. Later, that petitioner was extradited for a decree on 04.06.2018. The President of the Republic of Indonesia passed the decree in pursuant to an extradition request made by the Government of India.

Submissions Before Court

The Petitioner contended that his arrests in six other cases are illegal. And thus, it violates Section 21 of the Extradition Act, 1962. For this, relevance was put on ‘Rule of Speciality’ as given in Article 14 of the extradition treaty between ‘The Republic of India’ and ‘Republic of Indonesia’.

Mr. Bhardwaj (learned SPP appearing for CBI) does not counter the contention.

Court’s Decision

After hearing both the parties, The court stated that:

“It is clear from the language of Section 21 of the Extradition Act, 1962 that a person who has been extradited and returned by a foreign State cannot be tried in India for an offence other than the extradition offence in relation to which he was surrendered or returned.”

Further, the court relied on the case of Daya Singh Lahoria vs. Union of India & Ors. (2001),4 SCC 516, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the Doctrine of Speciality.

Hence, the Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru concluded that the accused cannot get arrested in any case, till a request for extradition gets merited. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments of the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author