UK judge notes ‘confidential impediment’ in Nirav Modi extradition case

A London High Court judge who refused Nirav Modi’s latest bail application this week has taken note in his judgment of a “confidential impediment” in the long-drawn extradition proceedings against the imprisoned diamantaire wanted in India on fraud and money-laundering charges.

Justice Michael Fordham on Thursday concluded at a Royal Courts of Justice bail hearing that there are substantial grounds for believing that if released on bail, the 54-year-old businessman would “fail to surrender” and his risk of absconding remained high.

While Nirav’s barrister argued in favour of his bail from London’s Thameside prison based on the “long passage of time” without trial, the judge highlighted the constraints of a “confidential” process that prevented his surrender to the Indian authorities even though the legal process related to his extradition had “run its course”.

“There is a ‘legal reason’ which relates to ‘confidential proceedings’. The nature of this is known to the applicant (Nirav Modi), and his lawyers; it is known to the Home Office, but apart from what I have recorded, nothing is known by the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] or by the Government of India, nor by this court,” Justice Fordham states.

CPS barrister Nicholas Hearn, appearing on behalf of the Indian authorities, confirmed to the court that he “recognises and respects” the fact of the “existing confidential impediment” and the fact of its confidentiality, for “whatever reason it is being kept confidential”.

“It is appropriate, in the circumstances, that the court should proceed with the same recognition and respect. But the consequence is this: there is, as a result, a significant limitation to what this court can realistically assess, when considering the risks and implications in this case, and for that matter when considering how to characterise the now long passage of time,” the judge concluded in his ruling.

The confidential proceedings, alluded to at various previous court hearings linked with Nirav Modi, are believed to refer to an asylum application, but the exact nature of the matter is unclear.

Meanwhile, Nirav has remained in prison in London since his arrest in March 2019 and has made at least seven previous bail attempts, which have all been rejected because he poses a flight risk.

Justice Fordham said he considered the legal appropriateness for him to consider the latest bail application “afresh” and with a “clean slate”.

“I have had close regard to the points which have been made about the human cost of detention. That includes all of the points that have been advanced about physical and mental health, including in terms of deterioration and delays in treatment, and the concerns very properly raised in the clinicians’ expert evidence,” Justice Fordham’s judgment said.

“I have also taken account of the evidence about assaults and threats and the prospect of coercion… But I am not able to conclude that, when put alongside the other relevant features of the case, they can serve to displace or undermine the assessment which I have described (against bail),” it said.

There are three sets of criminal proceedings against Nirav Modi in India – the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case of fraud in the Punjab National Bank (PNB), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) case relating to the alleged laundering of the proceeds of that fraud, and a third set of criminal proceedings involving alleged interference with evidence and witnesses in the CBI proceedings.

In April 2021, then UK home secretary Priti Patel ordered his extradition to face these charges in the Indian courts after a prima facie case was established against him.

India