[ad_1]
LONDON: A UK court has ordered the extradition of Indian defence middleman Sanjay Bhandari to Indiato face income tax evasion, black money and money-laundering accusations.
At Westminster magistrates’ court, district judge Michal Snow said on Monday he was satisfied with the assurances from the Indian government about the conditions Bhandari would be held in in Tihar Jail and sent the case to UK home secretary Suella Braverman to make a final decision.
Bhandari can now make representations to the home secretary as to why he should not be extradited. If she goes ahead and orders it, which is likely, he can apply for permission to appeal the judgment in the high court.
“India is a friendly government. India’s abstention on the UN vote regarding Ukraine does not justify a conclusion that it is no longer a friendly government,” Snow said. He added that he had noted with concern the UN’s findings on British citizens Jagtar Singh Johal and Christian Michel being arbitrarily detained in the same jail, but said that “India has a robust and independent judiciary. Individuals have access to the courts, which respect the rule of law. India is a friendly country governed by the rule of law. I have not been made aware of any assurance that has not been honoured. India has longstanding extradition arrangements with the UK, it benefits from the presumption of good faith.”
He said the Indian government had given assurances Bhandari will not be removed from jail for police questioning and so there was “no real risk” of him being subjected to torture. “There is a grievance redressal mechanism and prisons are regularly inspected by judges,” he said.
He said whilst he accepted there had been incidents of deaths and torture in that prison, he did not accept that this “established a culture” as opposed to sporadic individual events and was satisfied the assurances provided a system to protect Bhandari against such acts.
He pointed out that Dr Alan Mitchell, who claimed extortion and violence were rife in Tihar Jail, had not ever visited the prison.
Mitchell had also told the court that Bhandari “is the subject of a politically motivated attack by the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and his BJP administration. They are abusively wielding apparatus of the state to bring criminal allegations and cases against Bhandari in order to coerce him into giving (what would be false) testimony against the Gandhi family … the ultimate goal being to denigrate and discredit the Gandhis and the Indian National Congress politically…”
“The attack is further motivated by the desire to promote the business interests of senior business figures that are loyal and close to Modi and his BJP… His family members and associates have been subjected to harassment by the Indian authorities,” Mitchell had told the court.
But Snow took no notice of this, saying political persecution was not one of the grounds that Bhandari was pursuing.
Snow was equally dismissive of the evidence of Justice Deepak Verma (Retd), a former Supreme Court of India judge who had claimed Bhandari would never get bail in India and would end up being arbitrarily detained. “I was concerned that on occasions Verma became an advocate for the defendant rather than an independent objective expert witness,” Snow said.
The Indian government has given an assurance that Bhandari would have access to natural light, clean water, exercise, medical care and nutritious food, that he could see his family, friends and lawyers, his cell would be guarded 24×7, and he could take part in yoga and meditation in the prison complex.
Bhandari is accused of evading income tax in India between July 1, 2015 and February 7, 2017, under the Black Money Act of 2015 and Income Tax Act of 1961, by failing to disclose assets and income outside India, and of money laundering under the PMLA.
The Indian government alleges that he acquired a significant number of overseas undisclosed assets, including deposits in bank accounts, overseas shell companies and properties in the UAE and the UK, and that Bhandari had deliberately tried to conceal these and other properties from the Indian income tax authorities and failed to pay taxes in India on his global income.
At Westminster magistrates’ court, district judge Michal Snow said on Monday he was satisfied with the assurances from the Indian government about the conditions Bhandari would be held in in Tihar Jail and sent the case to UK home secretary Suella Braverman to make a final decision.
Bhandari can now make representations to the home secretary as to why he should not be extradited. If she goes ahead and orders it, which is likely, he can apply for permission to appeal the judgment in the high court.
“India is a friendly government. India’s abstention on the UN vote regarding Ukraine does not justify a conclusion that it is no longer a friendly government,” Snow said. He added that he had noted with concern the UN’s findings on British citizens Jagtar Singh Johal and Christian Michel being arbitrarily detained in the same jail, but said that “India has a robust and independent judiciary. Individuals have access to the courts, which respect the rule of law. India is a friendly country governed by the rule of law. I have not been made aware of any assurance that has not been honoured. India has longstanding extradition arrangements with the UK, it benefits from the presumption of good faith.”
He said the Indian government had given assurances Bhandari will not be removed from jail for police questioning and so there was “no real risk” of him being subjected to torture. “There is a grievance redressal mechanism and prisons are regularly inspected by judges,” he said.
He said whilst he accepted there had been incidents of deaths and torture in that prison, he did not accept that this “established a culture” as opposed to sporadic individual events and was satisfied the assurances provided a system to protect Bhandari against such acts.
He pointed out that Dr Alan Mitchell, who claimed extortion and violence were rife in Tihar Jail, had not ever visited the prison.
Mitchell had also told the court that Bhandari “is the subject of a politically motivated attack by the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and his BJP administration. They are abusively wielding apparatus of the state to bring criminal allegations and cases against Bhandari in order to coerce him into giving (what would be false) testimony against the Gandhi family … the ultimate goal being to denigrate and discredit the Gandhis and the Indian National Congress politically…”
“The attack is further motivated by the desire to promote the business interests of senior business figures that are loyal and close to Modi and his BJP… His family members and associates have been subjected to harassment by the Indian authorities,” Mitchell had told the court.
But Snow took no notice of this, saying political persecution was not one of the grounds that Bhandari was pursuing.
Snow was equally dismissive of the evidence of Justice Deepak Verma (Retd), a former Supreme Court of India judge who had claimed Bhandari would never get bail in India and would end up being arbitrarily detained. “I was concerned that on occasions Verma became an advocate for the defendant rather than an independent objective expert witness,” Snow said.
The Indian government has given an assurance that Bhandari would have access to natural light, clean water, exercise, medical care and nutritious food, that he could see his family, friends and lawyers, his cell would be guarded 24×7, and he could take part in yoga and meditation in the prison complex.
Bhandari is accused of evading income tax in India between July 1, 2015 and February 7, 2017, under the Black Money Act of 2015 and Income Tax Act of 1961, by failing to disclose assets and income outside India, and of money laundering under the PMLA.
The Indian government alleges that he acquired a significant number of overseas undisclosed assets, including deposits in bank accounts, overseas shell companies and properties in the UAE and the UK, and that Bhandari had deliberately tried to conceal these and other properties from the Indian income tax authorities and failed to pay taxes in India on his global income.
[ad_2]
Source link