EXTRADITION

EXTRADITION
 Derived from Latin words: ex and traditum

 Meaning: ‘delivery of criminals’, ‘surrender of fugitives’or

‘handover of fugitives’.

 “The term “extradition” was imported to the United States

from France, where the decret-Loi of February 19, 1791,
appears to be the first official document to have used the term.
 PURPOSE OF
EXTRADITION
To see that crimes may not go unpunished.
To serve as warning that by fleeing to another Country, criminal
cannot escape punishment.
To see that Country does not become safe haven for international
criminals.
Reciprocity and International cooperation.
Fair and Swift trial as witness and evidence freely available.
EXTRADITION

The term "extradition" was imported from

France, where the decret-Loi of February 19,

1791, appears to be the first official document

to have used the term.

EXTRADITION
Two states/nations are involved

The territorial state: where an accused or convict is found

The requesting state: where the crime has been committed.

Request is made through diplomatic channel.

 EXTRADITION
Formal, legal process for returning persons located in one country to

another for one of the following purposes:

 Criminal Prosecution;

 Sentencing(if already tried and convicted); or

 The carrying out of a sentence already imposed.

FOR INVESTIGATION?

No. The transfer of persons for any other purpose cannot

be termed extradition.
It does not apply to persons merely suspected of
having committed an offence but against whom no
charge has been laid or to a person whose presence is
desired as a witness or for obtaining or enforcing a civil
judgment.
DEPORTATION
Expelling of someone from a country.
Refers to the expulsion of foreigners.
Almost all countries reserve the right of deportation of
foreigners.
For foreigners involved in serious crimes, entered the
country illegally or wanted in and her country.
Done directly by Government’s executive apparatus.
Not done by order or authority of court-simple process.
No right or trial, legal representation or appeal.
 EXTRADITION VS
DEPORTATION
Extradition Deportation
In the interest of requesting state. In the interest of expelling state
Consensual cooperation of at least Unilateral action apart from the duty
two states of the receiving state to accept its
own national.
Consensual cooperation of at least Unilateral action apart from the duty
two states of the receiving state to accept its
own national.

Applies to criminal prosecutions. Can be on many grounds

Request of a state must. Order of the expelling state
EXCLUSION

By which an individual is prohibited from staying in one

part of a sovereign state.

Used to return deserters or absentees from Armed Forces

back to the custody of the units they belong.

 EXTRADITION - STAGES
Issue of Red Corner Notice/Location/apprehension of the fugitive.

NCB of the country making the arrest informs the requesting

NCB.

The NCB informs the police/LEA agency and asks them to send
the request for provisional arrest/extradition through diplomatic
channel.
 EXTRADITION TREATY
Treaty between Territorial State and Requesting State

Absolute pre-condition in USA, Belgium and Netherlands

 MEA is the nodal ministry.

India has extradition treaties with 39 countries.

Extradition from/to "non-Treaty States” is provided by Section 3(4) of

the Indian Extradition Act, 1962.

ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES
Reciprocity

Ne bis in idem

Dual Criminality

Extraditable offence

Rule of Specialty and

aut dedere and judicare
 ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES
prima facie evidence of the guilt of the accused is
essential (Sec.7(4) of Extradition Act, 1962).

Simplified extradition

Assurance on Capital Punishment (Section 34(c) of

Indian Extradition Act)
 EXTRADITION ACT, 1962

Repealed and replaced Indian Extradition Act, 1903 and

Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881

Role of Executive and courts.

Countries divided into Chapter II & Chapter III

 Ministry of External Affairs
THE EXTRADITION PROCESS Government of India,
[Extradition Act, 1962] CPV-Division, New Delhi

APPEARANCE EXTRADITION APPEAL

PROVISIONAL Request for AND SET HEARING (Court of Appeal)
ARREST AUTHORITY TO Sec. 377, 378, 482, JUDICIAL REVIEW
extradition PROCEED Sec.5 DATE FOR (Extradition
(Before Extradition (Requesting State) HEARING OR Magistrate
401 of Cr. PC and (Court of Appeal)
Request) Article 226 & 32 of
WAIVER Sec.7(1-4) Constitution of India

Court of appeal
DISCHARGE may order that
If documents not Sec.7(3) & 24 both hearings
Request for if if no Sec.7(1) Appearance of person
be Judicial review of
provisional arrest received within provisional provisional arrested under Sec.6 or
Joined Sec. Central
(Requesting State) time limits (60 arrest arrest Sec.34B (Magistrate) Appeal of Appeal of
committal Authority's order
Sec.34B days) discharge of surrender
Sec.7(3) Interim release or
Issuance of arrest
warrant or summons detention (Magistrate)
following authority to
Issuance of Disposition Disposition
proceed (Magistrate) Disposition under
authorization If no extention Sec.6 under Sec. under Sec.
to Competent Sec. 24
Review of Interim MINISTER Sec.
release or detention
Magistrate to (Court of appeal)
seek provisional arrest Arrest or service of
warrant (Minister of summons anywhere in
External Affairs) India (police) Sec.6 Sec.7(1) Appearance of
Submissions to the Central
Sec.34B person arrested Supreme Court
or summoned
Authority (MEA) Sec.7(4)
Leave to appeal and Any other
appeal to Supreme dispositio
Authority to proceed 60 days after Sec.7(4) Court of India from n
Consent to Central
Issuance of must be issued within provisional
Authority’s any of above
arrest committal
provisional arrest DECISION dispositions Sec.
warrant (Magistrate) Sec.8
Sec.7(4) Consent to
Sec.34B Order of
if no if authority to surrender Committal
surrende Postponement
proceed not issued Surrender order
authority r
Sec.8
of surrender upheld
to proceed within time limits Sec.7(1)
Set date for
Provisional arrest hearing
Temporary Execution of
anywhere in India Surrender
(Police) Sec.34B Waiver of extradition Surrender
Refusal
Sec.8 and conveyance order (grounds for Order (Sec.8)
Assurances
(Magistrate) refusal) Sec.34- or conditions
DISCHARGE 34A
Sec.7(3) & 24
Conveyed to
DISCHARGE
Requesting
Sec.7(3) & 24
State
 PROCESS FLOW FOR OUTGOING EXTRADITION
REQUESTS
Legally Y FER from Local Y Prov. Arrest Y RCN Subject? Extradition
LEA rcvd Process Starts
Complete? request by LEA?
@CPV?
N
N Req. sent back to N Has formal
State Police/CBI for extradition been req. N Fugitive released by
by LEA? the Requested State
revision
Y
Ext. req. under EAM’s sign. Request sent within N
Transmitted via diplomatic prescribed deadline?
channels
Y Ext. process/inquiry
begins in Req. State
Appeal against Decision in favor N Appeal against decision
of extradition?
x of Inquiry Magistrate?
decision?
N Y Y
N Has the appellate court
ordered release?

N N
Govt. of
requested state Y CPV/Indian Embassy liaises with the Indian LEA Personnel travel to the
determines Requested State about Logistics of Requested State to escort fugitive back
whether to Surrender to India
extradite
 EXTRADITION / DEPORTATION 2018

Fugitives wanted by India, arrested in India 13

Fugitives wanted by India, arrested/located in 21

foreign countries

Fugitives wanted by other countries, 02

arrested/located in India

Fugitives extradited/deported to India from 10

foreign countries
Fugitives extradited/deported from India to 01
foreign countries
 INTERNATIONAL CO-
OPERATION IN UNCAC
• Extradition
Art. 44

• Transfer of Sentenced
Art. 45 persons

• Mutual Legal Assistance

Art.46
 INTERNATIONAL CO-
OPERATION IN UNCAC
• Joint investigations
Art. 49

• Cooperation in using special investigative techniques

Art. 48

• Transfer of criminal proceedings

Art.47

• International cooperation for purposes of

Art.-51-59 confiscation
• Law enforcement cooperation
Art.48
 INTERNATIONAL CO-
OPERATION IN UNTOC
• Extradition
Art. 16

• Transfer of Sentenced
Art. 17 persons

• Mutual Legal Assistance

Art.18
 INTERNATIONAL CO-
OPERATION IN UNTOC
• Joint investigations
Art. 19

• Cooperation in using special investigative techniques

Art. 20

• Transfer of criminal proceedings

Art.21

• International cooperation for purposes of

4613-14 confiscation
• Law enforcement cooperation
Art.27
D-COMPANY
Extortion of Bollywood stars
on behalf of D-company.

Always used men from U.P.

who returned after completing
their criminal mission.

Liasion with Mustafa Majnu

and Mohd. Dosa to bring
explosives from Karachi.
MUMBAI BLASTS
1993 – Mumbai blasts –
257 dead.
Master mind behind the
blasts.
1997 – Murder of
Gulshan Kumar.
November, 1997 –
Detained at Sharjah.
Released mysteriously.
DON !
1998 – Broke with Anis
Ibrahim over sharing the
under world earnings.
January, 2000 – Attempt to
murder on Rakesh Roshan.
Extortion of Sharukh Khan,
Preity Zinta, Manisha
Koirala.
 EXTRADITION OF
ABU SALEM & MONICA

A Case Study
EXTORTION AND
MURDERS
2002: Match fixing scandal.
2001: Murder of Ajit Deewan, PS
of Manisha Koirala
2001: Murder of Mumbai
builders – O.P.Kukreja, Pradeep
Jain.
2001: Killed Muslims working
For B.R.Chopra.
INTERNATIONAL OPS
October, 2001 – Detained
again in Sharjah.
Escapes again.
Shifts base to Nairobi.
Enters USA and acquires
properties in the name of
Sameera Jumani, his first
wife.
India and US suspect Al
Qaeda link.
FORGERY

Obtained passport in
assumed name from RPO,
Lucknow and fled country
Declared Proclaimed
Offender on 19.6.95.
Interpol Red Corner
Notice No. A-103/3-1995
issued.
 ARREST AT LISBON
18-09-2002 : Judicial Police of Portugal arrested Abu
Salem (AS) and Monica Bedi (MB) in Lisbon.
20-09-2002 : The duo presented in Court. AS pleads
case of mistaken identity - says he is Arsalan Mohsin
Ali, a Pak national.
Identity confirmed with the help of finger prints sent
by CBI to IP-Lisbon.
MB admits real identity, she held a Hyderabad issued
passport in the name of Sana Malik Kamal.
 High Court of Lisbon grants
Abu's extradition

04-02-2004 : The High Court of Lisbon grants Abu's

extradition to stand trial only on such charges not
punishable by death or life imprisonment.

Ruling based on the technical interpretation of

International Convention on Suppression of Terrorist
Bombings. Both the Parties prefer appeal.
 FRESH ORDER OF
HIGH COURT
14-07-2004: High Court, Lisbon again granted extradition of
Abu Salem on the same terms and conditions on which the
extradition had been granted, giving justifications.
30-07-2004: Abu Salem filed appeal in Supreme Court
Portugal against the order of High Court, Lisbon.
30-07-2004: The Public Prosecutor filed appeal in the Supreme
Court, Portugal against the order of the High Court. Lisbon,
since extradition of Abu Salem restricted to those offences
which are not punishable with life imprisonment.
 ORDER OF SUPREME
COURT
27-01-2005: The Supreme Court of Portugal rejected the
appeal filed by Abu Salem against the order of the High Court
of Lisbon. The Supreme Court accepted the appeal submitted
by the Public Prosecutor and authorised the extradition of Abu
Salem for all crimes included in the extradition request
submitted by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Indian
Union.

16.2.2005: Abu Salem filed appeal in the Constitutional

Court against the order of Supreme Court granting his
extradition for all the offences.
ORDER OF
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

20.7.2005: Appeal filed by Abu Salem against the order

of the Supreme Court granting his extradition, rejected
by the Constitutional Court.

15.9.2005: Order of Constitutional Court becomes final.

 ECHR-UNHCR
Sept. 2005: Abu Salem moves ECHR against Extradition:
Request turned down.
Sept. 2005: Abu Salem seeks political asylum.
27.9.2005: Abu Salem filed application in the Court
stating that he has requested to the Portuguese Govt. for
asylum and suspension of extradition proceedings –
request rejected.
Abu filed an application before UN High Commissioner
for Refugees for intervention - request rejected.
 TRIAL OF AS IN
PORTUGAL
Abu was tried in Portugal for use of forged travel
documents and causing resistance during arrest. Charge-
sheet was filed on 14.05.2003.
12.11.2003: Abu convicted and awarded imprisonment to 4
and ½ years.
Abu filed Appeal in High Court against conviction.
19.07.2004: Appeal of Abu was rejected in High Court of
Lisbon.
12.10.95: Parole granted to Abu as per Portuguese laws
after serving 2/3rd of the period of sentence.
 SURRENDER OF ABU
BY PORTUGAL
Public Prosecutor filed Petition for the surrender of Abu
to India – The High Court accepted the petition on
18.10.2005.

19.10.2005: Intimation received from Portugal about

final extradition of Abu.

10.11.2005: AS handed over to Indian officers (DIG,

CBI, STF) at Lisbon Airport.
 RULE OF SPECIALITY
Decision of Supreme Court, (2011) 11 Sec 214
The punishment provided for the offences, not included in the
order of Supreme Court of Justice of Portugal, is lesser than
the punishment provided for the offences included in the said
order of Extradition.
The said offences are disclosed by the facts, which were
considered/proved for the purposes of extradition of appellant-
Abu Salem from Portugal.
Hence, no violation of Rule of Specialty
 ROLE OF NCB IN
EXTRADITION
Fugitive Tracking
INTERPOL Notices and Diffusions
IGCS/I-24X7
PLOs
Deportation
Extradition
Templates/Drafting/Dual Criminality
Assurances/Follow up/Coordination Meetings
Nodal authority for local prosecution
 EXTRADITION/DEPORTATION:
2015
Extradited/Deported fugitives include:
 NIKALJE Rajendra Sadashiv @ Chhota Rajan from
Indonesia, Jagtar Singh @ Tara from Thailand, Golap Baruah @
Anup Chetia from Bangladesh, Rajendra Bannanje from
Morocco, Kollam Gangi Reddy from Mauritius

Foreign fugitives located in India 8

Fugitives extradited abroad from India 3
 INTERPOL: INITIATIVES
Developed and forwarded Template for Mutual Legal
Assistance Requests to MHA.
Revised Indian Standard Draft for bilateral MLAT
submitted to MHA.
Developed Template for Extradition and Provisional Arrest
Request.
Forwarded draft of Revised Extradition Guidelines to
MEA.
Organizing 6th Global Focal Point Platform 17-19
November, 2015
 Action to be Taken by CBI-INTERPOL
on Location of Fugitive in India
Wanted by Foreign Wanted by Indian
LEA LEA
Fugitive Wanted by Non Treaty
Fugitive Wanted by Treaty Nation/ Treaty Nations (where
Nation (Where Treaty treaty provisions do not provide
for transmission through Establish identity particulars through
Provisions provide for LEA concerned and if found a positive
transmission of Provisional INTERPOL channel).
match, inform AD(NCB)/DIG/IPCU
Arrest Request through ICPO seeking approval to detain and hand
(INTERPOL) channel) over to LEA concerned.
On
On Arrival
Departure
On Arrival On
Departure

Seek approval of 1. Seek copy of Passport, details of

1. To treat Red Notice as PAR/Seek
DIG/IPCU
Provisional Arrest Request (PAR) from
detention/arrest
FLEA (NCB concerned) through ICPO
necessary
(INTERPOL) channel/ to effect arrest by
action.
obtaining Arrest Warrant u/s 34-B of
Indian Extradition Act.
2. Seek copy of Passport, details of duration and address
of stay in India from BOI concerned.
3. On receipt of PAR, inform MEA(CPV) Division. Jurisdictional
LEA may be instructed to obtain arrest warrant U/S 34B of
Extradition Act, consequent to approval of DIG/IPCU or
Competent Authority/ alternatively to arrest U/S 41g of Cr.PC.
duration and address of stay in India NCB – concerned is to be
for
from BOI concerned. informed as per the information
and
received from BOI concerned.
follow-up
2. Inform the NCB – concerned by
whom the fugitive is wanted and seek
reply as to what action they would like
us to take.
3. If they desire to seek extradition, ask for
PAR through diplomatic channels giving
the time frame.
4. If response is received desiring for seeking extradition before departure
of the subject from India, seek direction from DIG/IPCU or the
competent authority for further action in the matter.
THANK YOU