KAMLESH BABUNAL AGGRAWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition was initially instituted challenging the order dated 30. 10. 2002 of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi (ACMM) under Section 7 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (hereinafter called as the Act ). The ACMM held that there existed a prima facie case in support of the requisition and recommended to the Central Government that the petitioner be ordered to be extradited to the requisitioning foreign state i. e. , usa. This court, while issuing notice of the petition, had on 21. 11. 2002 directed that the petitioner shall not be extradited. Vide interim order dated 15. 10. 2004 in the petition, it was noted that though the order dated 21. 11. 2002 had only restrained extradition of the petitioner but the Central government, though not so restrained, had not acted upon the recommendation of the ACMM and had not passed any order on the request for extradition. This court, vide order dated 15. 10. 2004, ordered that the petitioner may submit to the Central Government a written statement within the meaning of Section 7 (4) of the Act within two weeks and directed the Central Government to pass an order in terms of Section 8 of the Act. It was further ordered that the order, if any, passed by the Central government under Section 8 of the Act of surrender of the petitioner to the foreign State shall not be executed without the permission of the court. The petitioner submitted a written statement dated 28. 10. 2004 through his advocate to the Central Government. The Government of India vide its communication dated 11. 01. 2005 to the Advocate for the petitioner intimated that the matter had been examined and the Government did not find reasonable grounds to accept the written statement of the petitioner and that the Government had taken a decision to surrender the petitioner to the US Authorities pursuant to the request for extradition.

(2.) THE petitioner, thereafter, amended the petition to incorporate therein the challenge to the decision of the Central Government to extradite the petitiener.

(3.) THE extradition of the petitioner was sought pursuant to the indictment of the petitioner for first degree murder by the Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County, Florida. The indictment charged the petitioner for violation of the Florida Statutes by causing death of Ms Deepa Aggarwal.