Extradition of Fugitive Criminals to India

Extradition of Fugitive Criminals to India

Context

Between 2019 and 2026, India successfully brought back 274 fugitive criminals from 36 countries. This was achieved through a structured three-pronged strategy focusing on global outreach, inter-agency coordination, and proactive diplomacy.

Key Legal & Policy Principles

• Administrative Nodal Body: The Consular, Passport and Visa (CPV) Division of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) enforces and manages the Extradition Act, 1962.
• Bilateral Framework: India maintains formal bilateral extradition treaties with 48 countries and extradition arrangements with 12 others.
• Dual Criminality: Extradition can proceed only if the alleged offense constitutes a crime under the domestic laws of both the requesting and requested states (usually requiring a minimum punishment threshold of at least one year of imprisonment).
• Rule of Specialty: Ensures that the extradited person is prosecuted solely for the specific offense(s) for which extradition was formally granted by the surrendering nation.
• Political Offense Exemption: Requests are denied if the offense is deemed to be of a political character. However, this exception strictly excludes acts of terrorism, violent crimes, and offenses covered under international conventions.
• Asset Confiscation Mechanism: The Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA), 2018 empowers Special Courts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 to forfeit properties and assets of economic offenders who have fled the country to avoid prosecution for claims exceeding ₹100 crore.   

• Retrieval Gridlock: Administrative delays in foreign jurisdictions have stalled 125 out of 137 outgoing Indian extradition requests over five years, creating a major barrier to physical surrenders.
• Evidence Drought: A substantial backlog of 533 unexecuted Letters Rogatory (LRs) deprives Indian law enforcement of critical overseas banking trails and documentary evidence needed to secure convictions in financial crimes.
• Human Rights & Litigation Strategy: Fugitives frequently challenge extradition in foreign courts by citing poor Indian prison conditions, invoking legal safeguards like Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) to delay proceedings.
• Confiscation Delays: Protracted judicial trials and appeals under the FEOA have delayed domestic forfeiture of offshore assets in a majority of high-profile cases.
• Citizenship Laundering: Fugitives exploit Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programs in microstates to acquire new passports, subsequently invoking the legal principle of "non-extradition of nationals" to block surrender.

Government Initiatives to Strengthen Extradition

1.Operation Trishul & Digital Geolocation:

Leverages satellite data, financial intelligence, and digital footprint analysis via Interpol networks to locate fugitives, track illicit money trails, and freeze overseas proceeds of crime.

2.BHARATPOL Portal Integration:

Integrates state police departments and central investigating agencies onto a single unified digital platform to route requests for international police cooperation efficiently.

3.Standardization via Standing Focus Group:

Establishes a dedicated Standing Focus Group under the Intelligence Bureau’s Multi-Agency Center (MAC) to standardize extradition dossiers, prioritize high-value cases, and streamline follow-ups with diplomatic counterparts.

Conclusion

While India has made steady progress in retrieving fleeing criminals, addressing long-term extradition bottlenecks requires modernizing prison infrastructure to meet international scrutiny, expediting LR execution through mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs), and building specialized legal teams to represent India's interests in foreign courts.