Fugitive jeweller Nirav Modi appeared at the high court here on Tuesday in a bid to get the court to “reopen” its decision to dismiss his appeal against extradition to India, claiming he had compelling new evidence.
Nirav’s barrister, Edward Fitzgerald KC, said the HC judgment in the case of defence middleman Sanjay Bhandari, in Feb 2025, which said he was at real risk of torture by the investigating agencies in India, and thus rejected his extradition on human rights grounds, was the “supervening event”. Nirav was also at risk of torture as he too would be interrogated by investigating agencies in India if extradited, Fitzgerald said. Extradition cases may only be reopened if significant new evidence emerges.
Three CBI officers, who flew over for the hearing, watched the proceedings, as did Nirav, who appeared via video link from Pentonville prison.
In the Bhandari case, the judges had ruled that the use of torture to obtain confessions in India was “commonplace and endemic”.
Fitzgerald claimed the investigating agencies in India had a “predisposition to torture”.
In a complete reverse of arguments used in the Vijay Mallya extradition case, when the CBI was referred to as a “caged parrot”, Fitzgerald, in this case, relying on evidence from Nirav’s former counsel in India, Ashul Agarwal, said, “The central govt cannot tell the CBI, ED and other independent agencies whether to interrogate or not — they are not parrots in cages like the Supreme Court said.”
Fitzgerald also relied on evidence from Justice Verma, a retired Supreme Court judge, who said that Delhi “cannot provide enforceable assurances on behalf of these agencies”.
Helen Malcolm KC, representing India, said New Delhi had provided a sovereign assurance that neither the CBI nor ED nor any other investigating agency would interrogate Nirav once extradited. She said the documentary evidence against him was good enough and this was another example of Nirav “manipulating the judicial process”, citing how he had once threatened to kill witnesses and destroyed evidence.
Lord Justice Stuart-Smith said if the sovereign assurance was breached the “remedy would be a breakdown of trust between UK and India”, a recipe for diplomatic mayhem.
“When it comes to interrogation and torture, India routinely disregards the rule of law,” Fitzgerald alleged. “The interior ministry cannot stop this endemic continuing as there is no effective monitoring,” Fitzgerald added. “The prison officers at Arthur Road Jail dare not stand up to the CBI.”
Judgment was reserved.
Ready to Make a Smarter Property Decision? Build Your Legacy with TOI Homes.
