ORDER

1. On 02.2.2022 learned counsel for the appellant had made a four fold submission as recorded in that Order. The first submission arose out of a plea that the judiciary should also honor the solemn sovereign assurance given by the State to the Court in Portugal while seeking extradition of the appellant (on 17.12.2002 and 25.5.2003). The plea thus was that the imprisonment term cannot extend beyond 25 years as per the assurance given even though the TADA Courts said it was not bound by the assurances as the judicial system was independent of the executive. His submission was that even if the TADA Court does not have the power, this Court can pass necessary orders based on an affidavit to be filed by the Central Government/ prosecuting agencies.

2. On this aspect learned counsel for the appellant had submitted that the third and fourth point i.e. arising from the consequences of Portugal Courts withdrawing permission for extradition on account of breach of the solemn sovereign assurance given and the merits of the controversy may not be required to be urged. The second plea was as to whether there should be a period of set off i.e. the period of detention under the Portugal auth