Toi correspondent from London: Expectations to extradite Indian government arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari from Britain on Tuesday received a final crushed shock when Tuesday UK High Court Delhi denied permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, which was in his decision to refuse Bhandari’s extradition.
Bhandari (62), who has been living in London, is now an independent person since he escaped from India in 2016. There is no further appeal that Delhi can do.
“We have been very relieved that the appeal has been successful and that the government of India has finally been denied for the holiday to appeal to the Supreme Court,” a lawyer of Edward Fitzgerald KC, Bhandari told TOI.
On 28 February, the High Court overturned the lower court’s verdict to extradite Bhandari, instead ruled that he would be extradited and discharged. Lord Justice Holroid and Justice Stan ruled Bhandari, there would be a real danger of forced recovery, torture or violence in Tihar Jail, and a quarrel of justice in testing in India will be denied a quarrel (violation of Article 6 of ECHR).
On March 12, the Indian government made an application to the High Court to certify the two points of the law of common public importance in the case and received a holiday to appeal to the Supreme Court’s decision to deny Bhandari’s extradition.
On Tuesday, Holroid and Stan refused to certify the Indian government’s law requested and also refused to leave New Delhi to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The judges stated that “neither of the suggested points consider by the Supreme Court” and that none of the suggested points of the law of general public importance were involved in the court’s verdict.
Bhandari is accused of developing taxes in India by not announcing an amount of foreign property and foreign income of Rs 665 crore on his Indian tax return, which means that he allegedly developed Rs 197 crore in taxes. He is also accused of money laundering.
The first point of the law that India wanted to certify was in relation to the judges’ decision that Bhandari needed to prove the attempt to avoid taxes, rather than proving that Indian authorities to prove that it was the willpower, according to the Black Money Act, was a major denial of justice. The judges ruled this “fundamentally destroys the fairness of future tests”.
The Indian government argued that it did not deny a quarrel of justice. The second point wanted to certify that it should have been asked to provide further sovereign assurance about the treatment of Bhandari in Tihar Jail instead of extradition.
Holroid and Stan said in their pronunciation: “The first suggested point does not reflect the court’s decision correctly, especially because it does not reference to the standard of evidence, which the legal provision applies to an accused person. The proof is a very unusual feature of that standard of evidence. Further assurances have been invited so far.
Neither with the question certified, there can be no further appeal.
Bhandari’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald starred for Julian Assange in his extradition fight in the past. Fitzgerald was allegedly discharged by the Pakistani National Jabir Motivala, D Company, and currently represents Nirav Modi.