THE high court in London on Tuesday (8) refused the overnment of India’s application seeking permission to appeal in Britain’s Supreme Court against the discharge of Sanjay Bhandari, the defence sector consultant wanted in Delhi to face charges of alleged tax evasion and money laundering.
Lord Justice Timothy Holroyde delivered the judgment at a brief hearing in response to India’s application last month.
It followed Holroyde and Justice Karen Steyn’s February 28 High Court judgment granting the 62-year-old businessman’s appeal against being extradited on human rights grounds.
“The court received an application from the government of India seeking certification of points of law of general importance and grant leave to appeal to the Supreme Court,” said Justice Holroyde.
“Having considered the written submissions, the court is satisfied that no oral hearing is necessary, and no further submissions required. The two points on which leave to appeal was sought is refused. The reasons being that neither of the points of law of general importance were involved in the court’s decision,” he said.
The first point referenced the “standard of proof” imposed on the accused person and the second was linked to the conditions in Delhi’s Tihar jail, which the Indian government maintained could have been addressed by further assurances.
“Neither of these points merits consideration by the Supreme Court,” the judge concluded.
The government of India, as respondent in the extradition case, had filed the application as the first in a two-step process. But with the first stage being refused, government officials familiar with the case are yet to confirm if a further permission to appeal application may be pursued directly with the UK Supreme Court.
In February, the court ordered Bhandari’s “discharge” from then home secretary Suella Braverman’s extradition order to face criminal proceedings in India on the basis of a Westminster Magistrates’ Court ruling in November 2022.
“In our judgment, having regard to all the evidence and information provided on this ground, including the fresh evidence, we conclude that in Tihar prison, the appellant (Bhandari) would be at real risk of extortion, accompanied by threatened or actual violence, from other prisoners and/or prison officials,” their judgment concluded.
The appeal was granted on the ground that Bhandari’s extradition would not be compatible with his rights under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) over his proposed custody in Tihar while awaiting trial.
The second ground under Article 6 of the ECHR, concerning the burden of proof, was granted to uphold his right to a fair trial. Bhandari faced two extradition requests: one in June 2020 for money laundering under India’s Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and another in June 2021 concerning an allegation of wilfully attempting to evade a tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable under India’s Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act 2015.
Bhandari had offered consultancy services to defence manufacturers bidding for Indian government contracts through his firm Offset India Solutions.
Kulsuma Aktergetty images
Police may probe anti-Israel comments at Glastonbury