India secured a legal victory in the U.K. on Friday as the High Court in London quashed a previous decision by a lower court to discharge alleged bookie Sanjeev Chawla, whom India had sought to extradite. The case will now return to the lower court for a new trial, after new assurances provided by India showed there was “no real risk that Mr. Chawla will be subjected to impermissible treatment in Tihar prisons,” said the judgment by Lord Justice Leggatt and Mr. Justice Dingemans at the Royal Courts of Justice.
Match-fixing scandal
In October 2017, District Court Judge Rebecca Crane had ordered Mr. Chawla’s discharge despite there being a prima facie case against him in the match-fixing scandal in early 2000, because of conditions at Tihar prisons in New Delhi, which led her to conclude there was a risk of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights being contravened. This article states that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Following a hearing in April, in a May judgment, the judges also ruled of the risk of Article 3 contravention, but said India should have the chance to offer assurances relating to the personal space for Mr. Chawla, toilet and medical facilities and also how India would ensure he was free from the risk of intra-prisoner violence in high security wards. In June, the Indian government provided further assurances, including that Mr. Chawla would be accommodated only in a single cell with proper safety and security and not within a high security ward, and would house inmates with “satisfactory conduct.” There were also reassurances around medical provision provided that the court saw as a “sufficient assurance.” They noted India’s “solemn diplomatic assurance” around four specific cells that Mr. Chawla would be held in.
The judge had rejected a defence application for Alan Mitchell, a prison expert who has testified for Vijay Mallya’s team in the extradition case, to provide testimony, noting he had not been provided with access to Tihar. “This application was refused because no reason had been given to explain why Dr. Mitchell should comment on the adequacy of the assurances.”
The judgment — while significant for India — is unlikely to impact the impending decision of Westminster Magistrates Court’s Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot on whether or not to extradite Vijay Mallya. Arbuthnot, at the final hearing before a judgment is set for December 10, said that for her the key issue was the prima facie case against him. The Chawla judgment also relates to specific conditions guaranteed to him at Tihar jail, rather than any broad-brush assessment of Indian courts more widely.
A date is yet to be set for the case which will return to Westminster Magistrates Court.
