Mehul Choksi Case: Modi Govt Could Face Trial in London of Kidnapping and Attempted Rendition
Ashis Ray
London: The Government of India will face trial in the High Court of England and Wales in London, following a civil suit filed by a diamond merchant of Indian origin, Mehul Choksi, accusing Indian authorities of kidnapping and torturing him in the Caribbean and attempting to rendition him from there to India.
The Narendra Modi administration denies the charge; but now have a case to answer on dates to be agreed upon by the parties concerned.
When Choksi's suit was filed, the Indian government pleaded diplomatic immunity and challenged the jurisdiction of the court to take up the case.
In a key hearing here on June 16, the Indian government lost pleas put forward by it in preliminary case management stage proceedings – that of bifurcating state immunity and jurisdiction issues and introducing an expert witness on India law from Choksi’s charges into separate matters.
Justice Clive Freedman, presiding over the hearing, dismissed the submissions. He also ordered India to pay costs to Choksi.
Harish Salve, a leading advocate of the Supreme Court of India as well as a King’s Counsel (or a senior) barrister in Britain, appearing for the Indian government, argued, ‘India objects to jurisdiction on the basis of state immunity … It is common ground that the state immunity points must be heard first … India respectfully submits that the above bifurcated proposal is the most appropriate course for the Court and parties, bearing in mind the Overriding Objective.’
He then submitted, ‘India also seeks permission for expert evidence on Indian law and the Indian constitution, both of which are important matters raised by the way that the Claimant (Choksi) has pursued his case against India, specifically for the purposes of opposing India’s state immunity.’ He objected to the way Choksi’s claim was served on the Indian ministry of external affairs as well.
Justice Freedman listened to Salve attentively, took copious notes, asked questions and sought clarifications over a two and a half hour hearing. He was, however, not convinced. He ruled that aspects like state immunity and jurisdiction can and will be part and parcel of the case which arises from Choksi’s allegations and seeking of damages.
Choksi has accused the Indian government of using five individuals who were or are based in the United Kingdom, to abduct him in Antigua and forcibly transport him on a boat to Dominica; physically abusing and threatening him throughout. An executive jet hired by one or more Indian law enforcement agencies flew into Dominica to secretly whisk him to India. This, though, was apparently prevented by a Dominican policeman turned whistle-blower, who exposed Choksi’s presence in the island. This led to a court intervention and his return to Antigua after about seven weeks.
On this broad narration, Salve maintained, ‘Critically, there is no evidence of India having anything to do with the alleged events. The claimant’s account is rife with non sequiturs and unsupported assumptions.’
Quite apart from the charge of the Indian state being involved in the criminality against him, Choksi maintained, ‘The abduction and attempted rendition of involved numerous participants of Indian origin, some of whom, such as (Gurdip) Bath (who is the second of six accused altogether), have demonstrated connections to the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as well as the prime ministers of Antigua and Dominica.’
Bath has in the past been identified as an attachein the St Kitts high commission in London. On May 30 last – as the hearing in London approached – President Droupadi Murmu of India accepted his credentials as a special representative of St Kitts and Nevis in India. Bath too has contested jurisdiction in Choksi’s case against him.
Edward Fitzgerald, K.C., representing Choksi, in his ‘Particulars of Claim’ listed various items of expenditure incurred by his client.
Over and above, he claimed ‘aggravated and/or exemplary damages’. He maintained, ‘The GoI has engaged in the most striking abuse of power … The GoI’s actions were criminal, and … of the most serious magnitude.’ Without spelling out a sum, he sought damages with interests and costs.
The 143-year-old Royal Courts of Justice in London is an exemplar of Gothic Revival architecture. Court Number 14, where the hearing took place, is a distinguished wood-panelled courtroom on the first floor, with a vintage clock reminding everyone of the time of the day.
Standing for defendants Bath and Leslie Farrow-Guy on the one hand, and Gurjit Singh Bhandal and Gurmit Singh (who was present at the hearing) on the other, were two more barristers. There was no representation for the Hungarian woman defendant, Barbara Jarabik, who, according to Choksi’s submission, wrote to him in response to being served a claim, ‘requesting that default judgement not be entered against her, and suggesting that she cannot afford to engage in litigation in England’.
Four men of Indian origin and a Hungarian woman named in conspiracy along with Indian government
Choksi filed his claim on May 17, 2024, alleging the Indian government through five named individuals abducted him from Antigua and forcibly transported him on a boat to the island of Dominica about 115 miles away. Three of the persons named in the conspiracy are men of Indian origin, a fourth man is English and the fifth person is a Hungarian woman.
On September 30, 2024, the Master of the King’s Bench Division at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, John Dagnall, issued an order granting service of the claim on the Indian government. On February 10, 2025, the British Foreign Office issued a certificate of service to the Government of India, which on April 11 acknowledged receipt of it.
On May 23, the Indian government applied to the court to say it has no jurisdiction to try the claim due to ‘state immunity, forum (seemingly arguing that Antigua and/or Dominica are a more appropriate forum) and other matters’. The Government of India’s objections will now be heard by the court.
Choksi’s lawyers wrote to the Indian government on June 4 inviting it to agree that ‘English law was the applicable law, or (in the alternative)’ and 'that the laws of Antigua and/or Dominica can be presumed to be materially similar’. New Delhi declined to concur.
Furthermore, legal issues in Antigua and Barbuda have ultimately got to be judged by King Charles III’s Privy Council in the United Kingdom, since he is head of state of the islands.
The prosecution's case is that ‘Between 23 to 24 May 2021, the Claimant (Choksi) was kidnapped from near his then home in Antigua. He was brutally beaten, including being punched, tasered to the face, blind-folded, tied to a wheelchair and gagged. He was knocked unconscious. He awoke to find himself on a sailing vessel, whereupon he was further beaten, knocked unconscious, and threatened with a knife that if he did not agree to voluntarily return to India once the boat arrived in Dominica, he and his family would be killed. Unsurprisingly, the Claimant suffered serious personal and psychiatric injury, the effects of which continue to this day.’
The argument continues, ‘On 24 May 2021, the Claimant was disembarked at the Cabrits ferry terminal in Dominica. Eventually, he was permitted to return to Antigua in July 2021. By this time, the Antiguan police force had started an investigation into his kidnap. In a report dated 25 June 2021, Inspector Adonis Henry concluded that “The plethora of real and circumstantial evidence makes it clear that a case of kidnapping with broad collusion amongst multiple conspirators exists.” The report named five individuals as conspirators.
'Narendra Modi knows Choksi personally and has publicly referred to him as ‘Mehul bhai’'
It went on to assert, ‘It is the Claimant’s case that the Claimant kidnap was orchestrated by the Government of India (D1). Only D1 had both the motive and the means to conspire with D2 to D6 (namely the five alleged conspirators) unlawfully to render the Claimant.’
Choksi's case is that the extradition process in Antigua – initiated by the Indian authorities in 2018 –according to officials there, ‘may not start for a further 7 years’.
‘This led the Government of India to formulate with the other Defendants the plan to kidnap and render the Claimant, which they proceeded to do. And it is telling that during the course of his abduction, (two of the alleged conspirators) expressly informed the Claimant that they were working on behalf of the Indian authorities as they sought – through torture and threats to the Claimant’s life and those of his family – to extort a false confession from him that he (in cahoots with the political opposition [in India]) was guilty of the allegations against him in India.’
All defendants have contested jurisdiction. In the narrative presented by the prosecution, the Hungarian woman was hired to lay a Mata Hari-style honey trap to lure Choksi. She denied being involved in the kidnap and stated she resides in Hungary. The prosecution responded by saying her last known address was in London.
Choksi partly won the first round of his battle in 2023, when the High Court of Antigua and Barbuda adjudged that he had an ‘arguable’ case and awarded him 75% of his costs.
A private investigation agency known as I-OnAsia is said to have handed over a dossier of the alleged crimes committed to Britain’s National Crime Agency and London’s Metropolitan Police, better known as Scotland Yard.
Its managing partner told the British daily Guardian, ‘We have examined everything, from flight manifests to hotel documents, which has painted a disturbing picture.’ London-based human rights lawyer, Michael Polak, was the first to complain to the same agencies soon after Choksi’s disappearance from Antigua in 2021.
Also Read: Belgium Court Rejects Bail Plea of Mehul Choksi, Accused in PNB Scam
Choksi maintained that around Diwali in 2018 – when he was in Antigua – he received a phone call from a prominent Indian businessman who is perceived to be close to the powers-that-be in India. This man, whom he named, advised him to return to India, where, despite the allegations against him, he would be extended ‘a safe harbour’.
It was detailed to Choksi that he would be arrested upon arrival, but because of his health issues, would be detained in a hospital. He was advised to donate money to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and assured he would be released after an interval. Narendra Modi knows Choksi personally and has publicly referred to him as ‘Mehul bhai’ or Brother Mehul.
When Choksi refused the offer, he was, he stated, told in Hindi he would be ‘uprooted by force’ (‘ukhar ke layega’). The alleged abduction and attempt to secretly bring him from Dominica to India on a private plane followed in 2021.
Cases in British courts involving criminality of governments
Cases involving criminality of governments are generally only admitted by British courts where regimes or systems concerned are not democratic. For instance in December 2019, the London high court ruled against Dubai’s ruler, Sheikh Mohammad bin Rashid al Maktoum, regarding the abduction of his daughter Princess Latifa – who had apparently escaped from him – by Indian coastguards or naval forces in the Arabian Sea in March 2018.
The judgement said, ‘The description of the way in which Latifa was treated by the Indian security services and also, once the Arabic man (her father’s agent) had identified her, does not give any indication that this was a “rescue” rather a “capture”.'
On the same subject a United Nations Human Rights Commission Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said, ‘The detainee (Latifa) was extradited (to Dubai) by the Indian forces, which had intercepted her yacht in international waters off the coast of Goa in March 2018, after the Prime Minister of India had made a personal telephone call to the Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates and the ruler of the Emirate of Dubai (Sheikh Mohammad).’
In 2023, Choksi relocated from Antigua to Belgium, where he is facing proceedings initiated by the Belgian government to extradite him to India. At a hearing at the Antwerp Court of Justice on 13 June, he was once more denied bail.
Choksi's lawyers in Belgium have dismissed as false news reports in India last week that detailed evidence was presented by investigators against Choksi at the bail hearing in Antwerp.
BS & D Law and Metis Advocaten, two sets of Belgian lawyers representing Choksi, stated, ‘No detailed evidence was presented by “the investigators”. It was still the basic extradition request file, as filed by the Indian judiciary authorities in August 2024. Supplemented by an extensive file of exhibits submitted by the defence to challenge the enforceability of the Indian arrest warrants.’
The law firms added, ‘The hearing took place in court in the morning and took less than half an hour. The prosecutor demanded to postpone the case in order to give the prosecutor’s office time to respond to the arguments of the defence. The court granted the postponement.’
Choksi’s lawyers also contested the Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) taking credit for tracking down Choksi in Belgium. They said, ‘Mr. Choksi had moved to Belgium in a legal way, and had registered his stay and address with the competent Belgian authorities. Mr. Choksi himself informed the judicial authorities of his move to Belgium. The Belgian and Indian authorities were already informed by Mr. Choksi himself of his move to Belgium in 2023.’
The London hearing took place on a day when Modi was headed to Canada for the G7 Summit. India is not a member of this body, but attends by virtue of invitations extended to it courtesy of the host country.
Modi was invited by Canada at the last minute after the Canadian authorities said the Indian side had agreed to cooperate with an onging investigation regarding the 2023 murder of Khalistani activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.
The Canadian authorities have been claiming they have proof linking Indian government agents to the murder.
In November 2024, Canada denied it had evidence that Modi was himself linked to violence on Canadian soil. But a senior Canadian official had the previous month accused Indian home minister Amit Shah of being behind the campaign of intimidation against Sikh separatists in Canada.
Ashis Ray can be followed on X @ashiscray
Note: This story was updated at 0730 am on June 17 to add details of the hearing
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
