PNB scam: Belgium's top court rejects Mehul Choksi's plea against extradition to India
PTC News Desk: Belgium's highest court has rejected Indian fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi's plea against his extradition to India. In the plea, he cited his extradition to India would expose him to torture, inhuman treatment and harsh prison conditions, however the court rejected his claims, paving way for his return.
Dismissing the appeal of Choksi, accused in the Rs 13,000 crore PNB fraud case, the Court of Cassation upheld the lower court verdict that approved India's extradition request while imposing a cost of €104.01 (Rs 11,000).
The fugitive diamantaire, who left India in January 2018 just days before the fraud came to light, had moved the Supreme Court in November. A key plank of Choksi’s defence was that extradition would expose him to a genuine risk of torture or inhuman treatment by investigating agencies. In support, he relied on NGO reports alleging custodial violence and abusive interrogation practices in India. The Belgian court, however, held that such general reports cannot be automatically extended to an individual case, noting that Choksi had failed to establish a real, personal and present risk if extradited. It emphasised that extradition law demands specific and concrete evidence relating to the individual concerned, rather than broad claims based on general reports.
Tihar jail argument rejected
Choksi also expressed grave concerns about prison conditions in India, particularly at Delhi’s Tihar Jail. Dismissing this claim, the court observed that the material produced regarding Tihar did not relate to Choksi’s personal circumstances. India informed the court that he would be housed at Mumbai’s Arthur Road Prison and kept exclusively in Barrack No. 12, a dedicated enclosure with attached sanitation facilities. It was further assured that Choksi would remain under judicial custody and not be placed under the control of investigative agencies.
Choksi additionally contended that Belgian courts had failed to adequately address each of his arguments on torture and detention conditions. The Court of Cassation rejected this submission, reiterating that courts are not obliged to respond to every argument individually.
- With inputs from agencies
