A fugitive criminal cannot be arrested and remanded to judicial custody solely on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by a court in a foreign country with which the Centre merely had an extradition arrangement without entering into a treaty, the Madras High Court Bench here has ruled.
A Division Bench comprising Justice S. Rajeswaran and Justice G.M. Akbar Ali passed the ruling while allowing a habeas corpus petition filed by the second wife of an individual who was accused of having escaped to Thanjavur district after murdering his first wife in Singapore in 1998.
A Judicial Magistrate at Thiruvaiyaru had remanded the accused on July 13, 2010, under Section 15 of the Extradition Act, after he was arrested by the CB-CID sleuths following a communication received from the Interpol on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by a District Court in Singapore.
The Division Bench held that the arrest and remand were illegal because Section 15 of the enactment fell under Chapter III which was not applicable to countries such as Singapore with which the Centre had an extradition arrangement alone without entering into a treaty.
Writing the judgement for the Bench, Mr. Justice Akbar Ali pointed out that criminals sought after by countries, with which the Centre had an extradition arrangement alone, could be dealt with only by the procedures stipulated in Chapter II of the Extradition Act.
“The Inspector of Police, CB-CID, Thanjavur was either ignorant or over enthusiastic in arresting the fugitive criminal as the facts of the case resemble an old Tamil cinema. Equally, the learned Magistrate also cannot be blamed as these types of cases are very rare. But, this Court is duty bound to settle the law,” he said.
As per Chapter II, it was mandatory for the Centre to order an inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate on receipt of any requisition from a foreign country to apprehend and hand over a criminal. Only after such an inquiry, could the Magistrate issue an order for the arrest of the fugitive criminal.
However, in the present case, the petitioner's husband was arrested and remanded without any inquiry. Only after his arrest, did the Centre appoint Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Court, New Delhi as an Extradition Magistrate to go inquire into the issue.
Therefore, the arrest and remand were illegal; the judges said and granted bail to the petitioner's husband on condition that he should execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.
He was also ordered to appear before the Thanjavur CB-CID police every day but for the days when he had to appear before the court in New Delhi for the extradition proceedings.
