New Delhi: A Delhi court this week dismissed two pleas by Christian James Michel, an accused in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam case, to get his extradition documents, observing that it cannot compel CBI to release papers he would already have had access to earlier.
Special CBI judge Sanjay Jindal, during a hearing on 19 November, noted that extradition takes place through diplomatic channels between two countries and doesn’t involve the accused in the processes followed by the State that is requesting extradition.
Since Michel actively participated in his extradition proceedings in the UAE, the court reasoned, he must already have copies of all relevant documents.
Michel, currently out on bail in AgustaWestland cases, had sought access to India’s extradition request submitted to the UAE on 15 March 2017, along with a complete list of documents with the CBI, arguing that these were crucial for a fair trial.
The AgustaWestland case centres on alleged irregularities and kickbacks paid to former defence ministry officials to secure a contract for 12 VVIP helicopters from the British-Italian firm.
Michel, accused of being a ‘middleman’ in the defence deal, was extradited from Dubai in December 2018, after which CBI arrested him and filed a chargesheet against him. The Enforcement Directorate also charged him in a related money laundering probe.
CBI: Pleas a delaying tactic
The investigating agency opposed Michel’s pleas, calling them yet another attempt to delay trial. It pointed out that Michel had already inspected both ‘relied-upon’ and ‘unrelied-upon’ documents in 2022.
Relied-upon documents are those that the prosecution can use as evidence in a case, while unrelied-upon are those collected but not used. Typically, an accused person is given copies of relied-upon documents, but is also entitled to a list of unrelied-upon documents if the defence believes it could help their stand.
The agency maintained that extradition documents form part of the case diary, which Michel is not entitled to get, and argued they need not be categorised as either relied-upon or unrelied-upon documents.
Michel had contended that the CBI was concealing the extradition papers by failing to list them in either category.
On this, Judge Jindal noted that Michel was provided lists of unrelied-upon documents in May 2022 and August 2022, undermining his claim of gaining awareness about the papers being part of unrelied-upon documents only in January 2023.
A previous dismissal
The special CBI court had dismissed a similar plea by Michel in January 2023.
Citing this, Jindal questioned the merit of the fresh pleas, given Michel’s failure to challenge the earlier order and the unexplained delay in filing the latest pleas.
“It is the prerogative of the investigating agency to prepare the lists of relied and unrelied documents and in case there is any discrepancy or deficiency noticed later on at relevant stage, the agency has to face the necessary implications as per law,” the judge observed.
But the court clarified that Michel retains the right to raise questions about extradition documents during arguments on charges, but at this stage, CBI cannot be compelled to categorise them.
The defence and the prosecution argue on the list of charges filed against an accused before a court frames the charges, leading to commencement of trial.
Citing the extradition treaty between the UAE and India along with guidelines by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the judge noted that extradition requests are sent through diplomatic channels and do not envisage any participation of an accused at the time that the request for extradition is being made.
“The applicant has not denied the averment that he had participated and was duly represented in the extradition proceedings held in UAE. So, if the applicant had duly participated in the extradition proceedings held in UAE, he must be aware about and have copies of all relevant documents,” Jindal said.
Spent over six years in custody
Since his extradition, Michel has been in CBI, ED or judicial custody until the Supreme Court in February this year granted him bail in the CBI case.
The Delhi High Court followed suit in March, granting him bail in the money laundering case being investigated by ED. The High Court noted the exceptional circumstances of Michel spending over six years in jail – a period comparable to serving full sentences, even before commencement of trial.
Michel, in August, sought a discharge (cleared of charges against him) on these grounds – that he had already spent six years in jail – but special CBI judge Sanjay Jindal had refused the argument.
(Edited by Prerna Madan)
Also Read: Quashing plea by AgustaWestland accused, Delhi HC flags ‘disturbing trend’ of media sensationalism