June11,2018-On Sunday, the Financial Times reported that the billionaire jeweler, contemned with around $2 billion fraud case in India. Nirav Modi, fled to the UK, where he is claiming political asylum.
Earlier in 2018, Punjab National Bank, committed that two of the jewellery groups owned by Modi and his uncle Mehul Choksi, had defrauded the bank of about $2.2 billion, by raising credit from overseas branches of other Indian banks, with the help of illegal guarantees issued by rogue PNB staff at a Mumbai branch over several years.
India’s ministry of external affairs replied to the FT that ‘the Indian government was waiting for the country’s law enforcement agencies to approach them before pushing for an extradition, which had thus far not happened. The ministry did not respond to a Reuters request for comment outside regular working hours. Britain’s Home Office said it does not provide information on individual cases’.
The FT reported, “Nirav Modi is in London trying to claim asylum from what he calls “political persecution”.
Modi and Choksi have denied any wrongdoing.
India, already seeking the extradition of Vijay Mallya’s fraud, a liquor and aviation tycoon, over unpaid loans to his co-owner of the Formula One Force India team and also the owner of Kingfisher Airlines moved to Britain in March 2017.
On May, The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed charges against more than 25 people including Modi, Choksi, former PNB chief Usha Ananthasubramanian, two of the bank’s executive directors and three companies belonging to Nirav Modi.
Other Senior executives of banks were accused by the CBI for misleading the central bank in late 2016 filling a charge sheet in court to lender’s handling of the financial messaging system and credit guarantees that were at the main heart of the fraud.
“Prison conditions which are systematically inhuman and life-threatening are always contrary to Article 3 ECHR. However, even if those conditions are not severe enough to meet that threshold, Article 3 may be breached if, because of a person’s individual specific circumstances, detention would amount to inhuman or degrading treatment,” – said the Home Office Guidance.