The Government of India v Chawla, Court of Appeal - Administrative Court, November 16, 2018, [2018] EWHC 3096 (Admin)

Resolution Date:November 16, 2018
Issuing Organization:Administrative Court
Actores:The Government of India v Chawla
 
FREE EXCERPT

Case No: CO/5183/2017

Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 3096 (Admin)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

DIVISIONAL COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 16/11/2018

Before :

LORD JUSTICE LEGGATT

MR JUSTICE DINGEMANS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark Summers QC and Aaron Watkins (instructed by The Crown Prosecution Service) for the Appellant

Helen Malcolm QC and Mark Weekes (instructed by Bindmans LLP) for the Respondent

Hearing date: 13th November 2018

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JudgmentMr Justice Dingemans (giving the judgment of the Court):

Introduction

  1. On 24 April 2018 Leggatt LJ and I sat as a Divisional Court, and heard an appeal against the order of District Judge (Magistrates' Court) Rebecca Crane (``the District Judge'') dated 16 October 2017 to discharge the Respondent Sanjeev Kumar Chawla (``Mr Chawla'') in respect of an extradition request from the Government of India dated 1 February 2016. The extradition was sought in relation to alleged conduct on the part of Mr Chawla who was said to have acted as a conduit between book makers who wanted to fix cricket matches.

  2. The District Judge had ordered Mr Chawla's discharge because having considered conditions in the Tihar prisons in Delhi, sometimes referred to as Tihar jails, and an assurance dated 28 February 2018 (``the first assurance'') provided by the Government of India, the District Judge had concluded that there was a real risk of treatment contrary to the right in article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (``ECHR'').

  3. For the reasons contained in the judgment dated 04 May 2018 ([2018] EWHC 1050 (Admin)) we found, among other findings, that the capacity at the Tihar prisons remained at 10,026 prisoners notwithstanding construction works at some prisons, but the prison population had increased to 15,161. There was evidence showing that the Courts in Delhi were investigating outbreaks of violence at Tihar prison, and there was material suggesting that recordings from CCTV cameras installed at the prison to ensure that there would be an accurate record of what occurred during outbreaks of violence were not available to those Courts. There were reports of intra-prisoner violence in High Security wards. There was some evidence suggesting that the Tihar prison board of visitors had not been visiting.

  4. In that judgment we also considered an assurance dated 22 September 2017 (``the second assurance'') provided by the Government of India which was in addition to the first assurance. We recorded that the second assurance provided a guarantee about space, but the attached photographs did not identify whether what was shown was a cell or a ward. The second assurance did not identify whether any of the wards were high security wards, where the evidence showed that there was a real risk of violence. Further, the second assurance did not identify whether the toilet facilities would be shared, and if so what those facilities would be. The apparent under recruitment of medical officers was a...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL