Key Points
- The UK has halted extraditions to India, demanding written guarantees that accused persons will not be held in Tihar Jail or subjected to inhuman treatment.
- Recent UK court rulings, including those in the high-profile Sanjay Bhandari and Virkaran Awasty cases, cite “real risk” of violence, extortion, and torture in Tihar.
- The UK’s Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor warns all future extradition requests will fail without these assurances.
- Indian government assurances about Tihar’s safety have been deemed insufficient by UK courts, referencing overcrowding, violence, and recent high-profile murders inside the prison.
- The UK’s stance is now a precedent, impacting other high-profile extradition cases.
New Delhi: India’s largest and most secure prison, Tihar Jail, is at the center of an international controversy as the UK government has formally warned that it will not extradite any wanted individuals to India unless it receives binding assurances that prisoners will not be held in Tihar or face inhuman treatment. This unprecedented move comes after a series of UK court decisions found that extradited individuals would be at “real risk” of violence, extortion, and torture in the Delhi prison complex.
UK Courts Cite “Real Risk” in Tihar Jail
The warning follows two major setbacks for Indian authorities. In February, the UK High Court blocked the extradition of alleged arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari, ruling that Tihar posed a credible threat of extortion and violence, especially for high-profile or wealthy inmates. The court cited not only the risk from other prisoners but also from prison officials, referencing recent incidents like the publicized murder of gangster Tillu Tajpuriya inside Tihar, which was caught on CCTV as guards stood by without intervening.
In April, the UK’s Westminster Magistrates’ Court rejected India’s request to extradite Virkaran Awasty and his wife, wanted in a ₹750 crore bank fraud case. The judge ruled that, unless India could guarantee the accused would not be held in Tihar or would be protected under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), extradition would violate their fundamental rights.
Written Sovereign Guarantees Now Mandatory
The UK’s Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor, who oversees extradition requests, has advised India that without an “unequivocal assurance” in writing guaranteeing that no extradited person will be detained in Tihar or subjected to inhuman conditions—future requests will be futile. The prosecutor emphasized that this requirement extends to all current and future cases, regardless of their merits.
“All these cases will inevitably fail and further legal activity on them is futile,” the prosecutor wrote, stressing that only urgent, written guarantees from the Indian government could salvage pending cases.
Indian Assurances Deemed Insufficient
Despite India’s efforts to reassure UK courts offering details about Tihar’s infrastructure, CCTV coverage, single-cell accommodations, and legal protections British judges found these measures inadequate. The courts cited systemic problems: severe overcrowding, frequent violence, corruption, and a lack of effective oversight. The murder of Tillu Tajpuriya, in particular, was highlighted as evidence that even high-profile inmates are not safe and that prison staff may not intervene to prevent violence.
Impact on Other Extradition Cases
The UK’s stance is now a precedent, affecting not only the Awasty and Bhandari cases but also future extradition requests involving Indian prisons. Legal experts note that similar arguments could be used by other fugitives, including those facing extradition from the UK and Europe for financial crimes or corruption.
Broader Human Rights Concerns
The UK courts’ decisions reflect longstanding concerns about Indian prison conditions, with previous extradition cases such as those involving Vijay Mallya and Sanjeev Chawla also citing overcrowding, lack of medical care, and the risk of torture or degrading treatment. International human rights experts have repeatedly highlighted these issues, noting that India has not ratified key UN conventions on prisoner treatment.
Unless India provides robust, court-accepted guarantees on prisoner safety and humane treatment, its ability to secure extraditions from the UK and possibly other Western nations remains in jeopardy. The spotlight is now on Indian prison reforms and diplomatic negotiations to resolve this unprecedented legal impasse.
