Fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi’s appeal against extradition was rejected by the Supreme Court of Belgium on December 9.
Court of Cassation rejects Choksi’s appeal
According to PTI, the Belgium’s Supreme Court-the Court of Cassation-on Tuesday dismissed the appeal of fugitive diamond trader Mehul Choksi challenging his extradition to India in connection with the alleged Rs 13000 crore fraud in Punjab National Bank, authorities in that country said.
According to officials who spoke to news agency, ANI, Choksi approached the Court of Cassation on October 30 to challenge the appellate court’s October 17 ruling.
Appeal was reviewed and rejected
Since the Court of Cassation examines only legal issues, the appeal was reviewed and rejected, allowing the Antwerp Court of Appeal’s decision to stand in full. This also ends the temporary suspension of the extradition order’s execution.
Antwerp Court of Appeal HAD upheld India’s request for extradition
The Antwerp Court of Appeal had earlier upheld India’s request for Choksi’s extradition in the Punjab National Bank (PNB) fraud case, concluding that the offences, alleged criminal conspiracy, cheating, embezzlement and forgery, are punishable under Indian law and correspond to comparable offences under Belgian law, thus satisfying the requirement of dual criminality.
One charge, relating to the disappearance of evidence under Section 201 of the IPC, was excluded because there is no equivalent under Belgian law.
Court: Choksi’s claims found baseless
The court had also noted that Choksi’s claims of political motivation and allegations of being forcibly taken from Antigua were unsupported by the material on record.
Indian authorities had provided detailed assurances regarding Choksi’s treatment and medical care once extradited. The court recorded that he would be lodged in Barrack No. 12 of Mumbai’s Arthur Road Jail, a facility with private sanitary amenities, and remain under judicial supervision, with movement permitted only for medical needs or court appearances. No credible indication of mistreatment or unfair legal process was found.
(With ANI Inputs)
