Mahadev Betting Case: Delhi Court Grants Saurabh Chandrakar 2-Day Transit Remand; Oman Rejects UAE Extradition Plea, Clears India’s Request

Mumbai, November 2, 2026: The Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi on Monday granted the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) two days’ transit remand of betting tycoon Saurabh Chandrakar, who was brought to India from Oman on Sunday. The agency had sought his transit remand, submitting that an open-ended non-bailable warrant issued against him by the Special CBI Court in Raipur was pending and that he needed to be taken there for further proceedings. The court directed the CBI to produce Chandrakar before the Special CBI Court in Raipur, Chhattisgarh, on or before November 4.

The CBI case, registered on December 18, 2024, concerns alleged offences of cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy and illegal betting, besides alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act. The case was registered after the Chhattisgarh government transferred the investigation into an FIR filed by the State Economic Offences Investigation Bureau, Raipur, to the CBI.

Defence Questions CBI’s Transit Remand Request

Opposing the CBI’s request for transit remand, Chandrakar’s lawyers argued that Oman had approved his extradition only on the basis of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) request in its money laundering case, and not the CBI’s request. They contended that his arrest in the CBI case violated the doctrine of speciality under Section 21 of the Extradition Act, which restricts prosecution of an extradited person to the offence for which extradition was granted, subject to statutory exceptions.

The CBI countered that it had also sought Chandrakar’s extradition and had received information from the Omani government regarding his extradition to India. It argued that its case concerned the predicate offence underlying the ED’s money laundering investigation and that both matters were being dealt with by the same Special Court in Raipur.

The Delhi court said the question of whether the CBI could proceed against Chandrakar in view of the extradition conditions and Section 21 of the Extradition Act could not be decided at the transit-remand stage. It left the issue to the Special Judge in Raipur, who had issued the non-bailable warrant and was dealing with the cases.

Oman Court Rejects UAE’s Extradition Request

Before Chandrakar could be produced before the court in Delhi, the Indian authorities had to undergo a lengthy legal battle in Oman to secure his extradition.

The Muscat Court of Appeal, in an October 8, 2026, order, allowed India’s request for his extradition and rejected a parallel request from the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The court held that India had fulfilled the legal requirements under Oman’s Extradition of Criminals Law, while the UAE had failed to provide the mandatory assurances required under the law.

The court was hearing two extradition requests concerning Chandrakar — one submitted by Indian judicial authorities and the other by the Public Prosecution of Dubai on behalf of the UAE. The requests were clubbed as they concerned the same individual.

India had sought his extradition under the treaty signed between India and Oman on December 26, 2004, whose instruments of ratification were exchanged in New Delhi on September 14, 2005. The Indian request stated that Chandrakar was wanted by a special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in Raipur, Chhattisgarh, and that a non-bailable arrest warrant had been issued against him on September 4, 2023.

According to the Indian extradition documents, Chandrakar is accused of involvement in illegal online betting operations through Mahadev Online Book and money laundering under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, 2002. The request was accompanied by a chargesheet filed by the Chhattisgarh Police on July 29, 2022, case-related documents, details of his alleged role, evidence, arrest warrant, relevant legal provisions and assurances required for extradition.

Chandrakar Claims UAE Acquittal

During questioning by the Omani Public Prosecution, Chandrakar denied the allegations. He claimed that he had already faced trial in the UAE in 2025 in connection with the same allegations and had been acquitted. He also expressed unwillingness to return to India.

His lawyer opposed extradition to both countries, arguing that Chandrakar had renounced his Indian citizenship in 2020 before the Indian Embassy in Dubai and had acquired Vanuatu nationality. The defence also contended that it had not been established that the alleged offences were committed within the territories of either requesting country or that offences committed outside their territories had affected their security or financial position. It further argued that the extradition requests did not fulfil the documentary requirements under Omani law.

The Muscat court sought clarification from the Indian Embassy on his citizenship. In a communication dated August 30, 2026, the embassy confirmed that Chandrakar continued to be an Indian citizen and was wanted for extradition to India. Rejecting the defence argument, the court observed that even if Chandrakar held Vanuatu nationality, it would not prevent his extradition to another country if the legal conditions under Omani law were fulfilled. The court relied on the official confirmation provided by the Indian Embassy to establish his Indian citizenship.

India Provides Mandatory Assurances

The court examined the assurances submitted by India under Article 11 of Oman’s Extradition of Criminals Law. These included undertakings that Chandrakar would not be prosecuted for offences unrelated to the extradition request, would not be surrendered to a third country without Oman’s consent and would receive a fair trial with adequate rights of defence. Finding that India had met these requirements, the court allowed its request.

In contrast, the court found that the UAE had not provided the mandatory assurances regarding prosecution for other offences, surrender to a third country and guarantees of a fair trial. It also took into account that India’s request had been submitted earlier and that Chandrakar’s Indian citizenship had been officially confirmed. Invoking Article 6 of Oman’s extradition law, the court gave precedence to India’s request and rejected the UAE’s plea.

Separate Case In Oman Delays Handover

However, the court recorded that Chandrakar was facing a separate criminal case in Oman for allegedly using a forged travel document. He was apprehended at Muscat International Airport while attempting to leave the country using the document, which he had allegedly also used to enter Oman. A case, numbered 14691/5100/2026, was registered against him before the Seeb Primary Court.

Also Watch:

Under Article 5 of Oman’s extradition law, the court directed that his handover be deferred until the conclusion of the trial, delivery of a final judgment and execution of any sentence imposed in that case. The October 8 order, therefore, allowed India’s extradition request while rejecting the UAE’s, but made Chandrakar’s actual handover subject to the outcome of the separate Oman proceeding.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/