The extradition of Diamond merchant Nirav Modi was ordered by a UK Court this Thursday (February 25, 2020) , in the 14,000 crores scam case with Punjab National Bank (PNB).
The UK Court declared that nothing unusual was found about his health condition thus dimissing his health concern and ruling that the diamantaire must withstand trial in India.
The Court believed that there was enough evidence gathered to order an extradition against Nirav Modi and was sufficient to allow extradition to face charges in India. The court also rejected all arguments that the defence submitted which were regarding human rights violations, fair trial, and prison conditions.
The accused being charged for fraud, money laundering and intimidating witnesses in the estimated USD 2-billion Punjab National Bank (PNB) scam case, is most likely to be in Barrack 12 of Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai on his return to India. The said jail is known for houses various high-profile prisoners and those who are and could be threatened by or to others. Each cell in the jail is known for housing about 10-15 persons as inmates but the special Barrack 12 which the diamond merchant shall likely occupy houses just one single individual. There special barracks are usually used when high-profile or high terror persons are housed in the jail.
The Court said, Therefore, in accordance with S.87(3) EA 2003 I am sending this case to the Secretary of State for a decision as to whether Nirav Modi is to be extradited. But Modi was given the right to appeal to the High Court, however, the appeal is not to be heard until the Secretary of State has itself made a decision. The court ordered that the appeal must be made within 14 days after the Secretary of State makes a decision, adding The appeal can be on a point of law or fact or both
The CBI commented on the matter saying, Todays judgement of Westminster Magistrates Court is a significant achievement in the context of CBIs efforts to curb corruption and is a reminder that fugitives, who have eluded the process of law after commission of large value frauds, cannot consider themselves above the process merely because they have changed jurisdictions
District Judge Samuel Goozee gave the judgement in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London on February 25. The accused, the 49-year old jeweller, was given fair trial in London and the previous submissions by Justice Markandey Katjus in Modis defence were rejected after examination. The Court Observed that retired judges opinions and commented, In relation to the CBI, Justice Katju explains there is evidence that the Government blatantly interferes with the CBIs functions and that it functions under the direction of the ruling government. Justice cannot be expected from an institution which itself is caged. As far as the ED is concerned his opinion is that they are under the complete control of the government
