DARSHAN KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 20.5.1997, the petitioner approached this Court praying for quashing the order dated 16.5.1997 passed by the respondent to extradite him to Canada and further to set him at liberty or in the alternative to direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders for conduct of his trial in India on such terms and conditions, as may be deemed appropriate.

(2.) Pursuant to request for provisional arrest made on 4.4.1996 oh behalf of the Canadian Government, the petitioner was arrested on 6.4.1996 at New Delhi. On 1.5.1996 formal request was made by the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi to respondent No. 1 for the petitioner's extradition to Canada. Respondent No. 1, in exercise of its powers under Section 5 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') passed an order on 19.7.1996 requesting Mrs. Neena Krishna Bansal, Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi to conduct an enquiry into the matter under the Act. Warrants of petitioner's production were issued on 6.8.1996 and from judicial custody he was produced before the Extradition Magistrate on 28.9.1996._ Enquiry though commenced, could not be concluded by Mrs. Neena Krishna Bansal. Another order was passed for Magisterial enquiry on 7.1.1997 by which Mr. Virender Kumar Bansal, Metropolitan Magistrate was asked to enquire into the matter. Enquiry thereafter was conducted and completed by Mr. Virender Kumar Bansal.

(3.) In support of the enquiry, witnesses were examined by the respondent. The petitioner submitted his statement in writing. After the parties were heard, Extradition Magistrate on 18.3.1997 prepared and signed his report. It was sent to respondent No. 1 recommending that the petitioner be extradited since in his opinion, prima facie case was made out against the petitioner. Copy of the report received by respondent No. 1 on 19.3.1997 is placed on record as Annexure R-1. Respondent No. 1 on 16.5.1997, in exercise of its powers under Section 8 of the Act passed the following order directing that the petitioner, who had been committed to judicial custody by the Extradition Magistrate, be delivered to Canadian Escort Officer for taking him back to Canada :