$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 16^th March, 2021

Date of decision: 7^th April, 2021

+

W.P.(C) 1541/2021 & CM APPL. 8482/2021

MILEN IVANOV DAVRANSKI

..... Petitioner

Through:

Ms.

Tanya

Aggarwal

and

Mr.

Navneet Kumar, Advocates.

versus

UNION OF INDIA

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr.

Rajeev

Sharma,

Mr.

Rajat

Krishna and Mr. Saket Chandra,

Advocates.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

1.

The Petitioner, who is a Bulgarian National, has preferred the present

writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus against the Union of India, to take

steps to expedite the extradition of the Petitioner to Bulgaria i.e. his

homeland.

2.

The Petitioner is currently lodged in Central Jail, Tihar.

3.

The brief background of the case is that a request was received by the

Union of India from the Ministry of Justice, Government of Bulgaria,

through the diplomatic channels, requesting for extradition of the Petitioner,

vide letter dated 17^th July 2020. Upon the said request being received, the

Union of India, under section 5 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (hereinafter,

“the Act”), had requested the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-01,

Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter, “ACMM”) to enquire into the

extradition request relating to the Petitioner, in view of the offences

2021:DHC:1223

involved, by determining as to whether a prima facie case for extradition is

made out against the accused, in accordance with the provisions of the Act

and the Extradition Treaty between the Union of India and the Government

of Bulgaria.

4. The said request was considered by the ld. ACMM and the ld. ACMM

recommended the extradition, vide order dated 6^th November, 2020. The ld.

ACMM held:

requesting state i.e. Republic of Bulgaria.”

5. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition is that though

the ld. ACMM recommended extradition, the process of extradition has not

been given effect to, yet, and the Petitioner is still confined in prison. Hence

the present writ petition, has been filed by the Petitioner, praying for

directions to the Union of India to expedite his extradition. The relief

2021:DHC:1223

sought for in this petition is as under:-

extradite the petitioner to Bulgaria.”

6. The matter was first heard on 5^th February, 2021, on which date an

objection was raised on behalf of the Union of India under Section 31(1)(d)

of the Act stating that there are three FIRs, pending against the Petitioner in

the State of Goa, and the same are unconcerned with the offence concerned

in extradition proceedings. Hence, on the said date, permission was sought

by the Union of India to place the details of the said cases on record before

this court. The Union of India has since filed its counter affidavit and

submissions have been made on behalf of the authorities concerned.

7. Vide order dated 2^nd March, 2021, a direction was also given to the

Petitioner to supply his address in Goa and the Government of Goa was

impleaded and directed to verify the same. The address had been supplied in

compliance of the said order. Mr. Patil, ld. counsel, appearing for the State

of Goa has also confirmed that the address given by the Petitioner, in Goa,

stands verified.

8. The question that now arises in this petition is as to whether the

Petitioner’s extradition, in terms of the order of the ACMM, is to be allowed

to be expedited or not.

Submissions of the Petitioner

9. The contentions of Ms. Aggarwal, ld. counsel appearing for the

Petitioner, arguing for expedited extradition of the Petitioner, are as under:-

2021:DHC:1223

(i)

That Section 24 of the Act is extremely clear to the effect that if

a person has been permitted to be extradited upon an inquiry

under section 5 by the ACMM, he would have to be discharged

immediately, unless sufficient cause exists to t