The Delhi High Court refused to entertain Christian Michel’s plea challenging Article 17 of the India–UAE Extradition Treaty, stating that treaties are not parliamentary laws that can be declared illegal. Michel has been allowed to file a fresh, properly framed petition.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Monday declined to entertain a plea filed by Christian Michel, the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam, seeking to declare a key provision of the India–UAE Extradition Treaty as illegal.
A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain remarked that the petition, challenging Article 17 of the 1999 treaty, could not be considered in its current form and must include consequential reliefs.
What Was Michel Challenging?
Michel challenged Article 17 of the India–UAE extradition treaty, which allows India to prosecute extradited persons not only for the specific offence for which extradition was granted but also for “connected offences.”
He contended that this violates Section 21 of the Extradition Act, which bars prosecution of an extradited accused for offences not explicitly mentioned in the extradition decree.
Michel also argued that Indian agencies unlawfully introduced Section 467 IPC (forgery), which carries life imprisonment, through supplementary chargesheets, despite the UAE extradition order not covering this offence.
Court’s Observation
The Bench made it clear that the Court cannot declare a treaty provision as illegal when a treaty is not legislation passed by parliament.
“You are saying there is a certain treaty. It is not passed by the parliament, which means it is not a law. If it is not a law, it cannot be declared ultra vires,”
the Bench observed.
The judges added that the Court would not issue declarations in a vacuum:
“We don’t grant simply declarations that this is my right. What is the consequential relief you want?”
Given the lack of proper framing, the Court suggested that Michel withdraw the petition and file a fresh one.
Advocate Aljo K Joseph, appearing for Michel, agreed to withdraw the petition and submit a more comprehensive plea containing all required reliefs.
Background
Michel, a British national, was extradited from Dubai on December 4, 2018, and has remained in custody since.
He is accused of acting as a middleman to facilitate the VVIP helicopter deal awarded to AgustaWestland by the then UPA government. Investigators allege:
- Michel had 12 contracts with AgustaWestland to channel kickbacks
- Illicit payments totaled €42.27 million
- Around US$33 million in bribes were routed through bank accounts in the UK and the UAE
Michel Claims
Michel’s plea also stated:
- He has already served the maximum sentence possible for the offences for which he was extradited.
- His continued detention in India is therefore illegal.
- The original 2017 CBI chargesheet invoked Sections 8, 9, and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which then carried a maximum five-year sentence.
- His incarceration, including custody during UAE extradition proceedings, exceeds this limit.
Appearance:
For the CBI: Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) DP Singh
Click Here to Read More Reports On James Michel