The judgement within the Nirav Modi extradition case will likely be delivered within the Westminster Magistrates Courtroom on February 25, choose Samuel Goozee introduced on Friday on the finish of a two-day listening to after defence groups made concluding arguments.
Claire Montomery, Modi’s lawyer, and Helen Malcolm of the Crown Prosecution Service representing India, quoted from emails, witness statements, financial institution and different paperwork, and offered their variations on points resembling jail situations, psychological well being therapy amenities and the potential for a Modi receiving a good trial, if extradited.
Underneath the UK-India extradition treaty, India wants to ascertain in UK courts that there’s a prima facie case in opposition to the particular person requested – not a conviction – based mostly on prices that will quantity to offences in regulation in each international locations.
One in every of Montgomery’s main objections to the extradition is the alleged lack of a prima facie case in opposition to Modi, which was countered by Malcolm, who argued that the fees in opposition to Modi would quantity to related prison prices below British regulation.
“There’s multiplicity of proof”, Malcolm advised the courtroom, that Modi indulged in fraud in relation to in search of loans from the Punjab Nationwide Financial institution in Mumbai. The proof is ample to ascertain a prima facie case in opposition to him, she stated.
Malcolm additionally reiterated India’s prices that Modi interfered with witnesses, was concerned in destroying servers and cell phones, and likewise threatened to kill one of many witnesses. It isn’t for the courtroom to “begin double-guessing” what quantities to a criminal offense in India, she added.
Apart from the alleged lack of a prima facie case, Modi’s defence crew has argued that he wouldn’t obtain a good trial in India, wouldn’t obtain acceptable therapy for psychological illnesses and that there was a threat of suicide. There was no proof on India’s cost that Modi and others conspired to defraud the financial institution, the crew argued.
Modi, 49, who’s lodged within the Wandsworth jail in west London and attended the listening to remotely, sporting a jacket and sporting a beard, is the topic of two extradition requests; one processed by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the opposite by the Enforcement Directorate.
Expenses in opposition to Modi contain PNB’s Mumbai department that prolonged his firms loans price over Rs 11,300 crores. The CBI case pertains to large-scale fraud upon PNB, by the fraudulent acquiring of Letters of Understanding (LOUs/mortgage agreements); the ED case pertains to the laundering of the proceeds of that fraud.
The second extradition request was made on the idea of two extra offences as a part of the CBI case, referring to allegations that Modi interfered with the CBI investigation by “inflicting disappearance of proof” and intimidating witnesses (”prison intimidation to trigger loss of life”).