UK High Court Rejects Nirav Modi Plea To Reopen Extradition Appeal, Accepts India’s Assurances On No Custodial Interrogation

Mumbai, March 26: The UK High Court has turned down the request of fugitive businessman Nirav Modi to reopen his extradition appeal, considering India’s assurance that he will not be subjected to custodial interrogation by any of the agencies probing cases registered against him.

Appeal based on fear of custodial interrogation

Modi had sought to reopen his extradition appeal citing the apprehension that he would be taken into custody by all the investigating agencies for interrogation and would be subjected to torture.

He cited the case of Sanjay Bhandari, whose extradition was rejected by UK authorities. In response, the Indian government assured the court that he would not be subjected to custodial interrogation, as it is not required since all cases are now before the respective courts for trial.

Court accepts India’s assurances

Considering this, the UK High Court stated in its order: Although India is not a signatory to UNCAT (United Nations Convention against Torture), Indian law also does not permit any instances of torture on any individual. “The Government of India has provided a sheaf of assurances that are comprehensive, detailed, and reliable,” the court added.

Extradition proceedings since 2018

Indian agencies initiated proceedings for Modi’s extradition back in 2018. On February 25, 2021, a district judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court paved the way for his extradition, holding that “there were no bars to extradition and the case was sent to the Secretary of State.” In April 2021, the court ordered Modi’s extradition to India.

Previous appeal and rejection

However, in October 2022, Modi filed an appeal against the order on two preliminary counts. Firstly, he said his extradition to India would be compatible with his Convention rights under Article 3 (prohibition against torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim's conduct), and secondly, he said it would not be unjust or oppressive within the meaning of section 91 (bar on extraditing a person considering his mental and physical health) of the Extradition Act 2003 to extradite him by virtue of his physical or mental condition.

The UK High Court rejected his appeal in November 2022, accepting the assurance from the Government of India that “Modi would be held at Barrack No 12, Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai and that he would receive relevant and necessary medical treatment from a private doctor or mental health expert of his choice.” With this, the permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was also refused.

Subsequent legal attempts

However, as doors closed, Modi soon approached the UK authorities against the extradition, creating an impediment to his extradition. The proceedings were said to be confidential, and the Indian government was not made party to it. The UK government had refused to entertain his plea on August 13 last year, paving the way for his extradition.

However, five days later, on August 18, 2025, Modi moved what was said to be a last resort. He sought to re-open his appeal on the basis of the judgement of Sanjay Bhandari, wherein a UK court had refused to extradite him, citing risk of inhumane treatment, such as extortion and violence in Tihar Jail.

Court findings on assurances

It was contended that there is a risk in extraditing Modi as he is likely to be detained by a number of investigative authorities for interrogation. During the proceedings, Indian agencies in September last year gave an assurance — firstly, neither the CBI nor the ED is empowered under Indian law to interrogate Modi after he is extradited in connection with the offences for which he is being extradited, and secondly, in any event, there is no intention or need to interrogate Modi because these cases are ready to proceed to trial.

The court, after considering this, observed that, “the terms of the assurances have been disclosed sufficiently to the Court. The assurances are specific and not general and vague. The assurances have been given by an official within the Ministry of Home Affairs competent to bind the Government of India, as well as the State of Maharashtra and the five investigating agencies.” However, the court said that if he is to be interrogated, it would be a breach of the assurance.

Also Watch:

“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 Modi,” the court said while rejecting his plea.

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