UK court refused to reopen Nirav Modi's case against extradition on 'quality of GoI assurance'

New Delhi: The London High Court relied on the "quality of assurances" given by the Government of India in its note verbale while rejecting fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi's petition to reopen his case against extradition, officials said.

Modi, who is wanted in India in connection with a Rs 13,000-crore Punjab National Bank fraud, had approached the London court to reopen his case on the basis of the judgment in fugitive economic offender Sanjay Bhandari's case, where extradition was dropped on the possibility of torture by Indian agencies.

The London High Court had discharged Bhandari from the extradition order on human rights grounds.

"Refusing" the permission to reopen Modi's case, the Bench Lord Justice Stuart Smith and Justice Jay in the High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division, said they relied on "the quality of assurances" given by the Indian government in its note verbale.

"When Mr Modi's case came before us in the autumn of 2022, the material underpinning the decision in Bhandari was either not available or was not drawn to our attention. This court's judgment in the Bhandari case presents a worrying picture of the use of proscribed treatment to obtain confessions, which was characterised as commonplace and endemic," the UK court said in its judgment.

"Were it not for the statements made and assurances given by the GoI between September 2025 and February 2026, culminating in the note verbale to which we accord considerable weight, we would be minded to reopen this appeal in the exercise of exceptional power," the court held.

The Bench rejected the argument that there was a "real risk of torture or other ill-treatment" during the journey from prison to the trial court in Mumbai.

The court said it has considered the assurances very carefully.

"On one hand, the mutual confidence and trust that exists between two friendly powers who have entered into binding treaty arrangements must be accorded considerable weight, as well as concomitant solemn assurances proffered within the same framework.

"On the other hand, we must recognise that there is some force in (Modi's lawyer) Mr Fitzgerald's submission that some of the affidavit evidence placed before us comes from persons who, on the basis of Bhandari, have condoned or turned a blind eye to unacceptable treatment of detainees," it said.

The Bench held that the assurances given by the Indian government are "specific and not general and vague." The Union Home Ministry had sent a detailed plan to keep Nirav Modi in Arthur Road prison, the facilities he would enjoy, and legal help that would be available to him during the trial.

"The assurances have been given by an official within the Ministry of Home Affairs competent to bind the GoI, as well as the State of Maharashtra and the five investigating agencies (which are also bound in our view by the terms of the assurances)," it held.

The Bench said that although India is not a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, it "did not doubt that torture is not permitted under Indian law." "In our judgment, it is sufficient for present purposes that the assurances are cognisable at a diplomatic level because the consequences of any breach would be extremely damaging to the relationship of mutual trust and confidence between India and the United Kingdom, particularly in the context of such a high-profile individual as Mr Modi," it held.

The Crown Prosecution Service advocate, assisted by a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) team, strongly put forth arguments against Modi's petition.

A team of CBI officials, including investigating officers, travelled to London for the hearing.

"The reopening application had been filed on the basis of the Bhandari judgment. However, with sustained and coordinated efforts of the CBI, the challenge was successfully overcome," a CBI spokesperson said in a statement here on Wednesday.

"CBI has been seeking the extradition of Nirav Modi in connection with the Punjab National Bank scam involving significant financial wrongdoing with the public sector bank, with proceedings ongoing since 2018," she said.

The UK courts approved Modi's extradition following his arrest in 2019 and rejected his earlier appeals, finding no legal barriers and accepting assurances regarding his treatment in India, she added.

Modi, who allegedly defrauded the public sector bank in collusion with his uncle Mehul Choksi, has been in a UK prison since March 19, 2019.

Modi alone had siphoned off Rs 6,498.20 crore, the spokesperson said.