Judicial review in extradition cases provides a vital check on the executive’s power to surrender individuals to foreign states. Indian courts play a key role in safeguarding legality, fairness, and fundamental rights throughout the extradition process.
Courts verify whether the person’s arrest and detention pending extradition comply with legal requirements.
Habeas corpus petitions challenging unlawful detention are routinely entertained.
Review whether a valid treaty or arrangement exists with the requesting country.
Examine if the extradition request meets the formal and substantive treaty conditions.
Confirm that the offence for which extradition is sought is a crime in both India and the requesting country.
While courts do not conduct a full trial, they ensure prima facie evidence supports the allegations justifying extradition.
Assess whether the offence is political in nature, which can bar extradition under Indian law and treaties.
Courts evaluate human rights concerns including the risk of torture, capital punishment, or violation of fair trial rights if extradition proceeds.
Ensure that procedural safeguards like proper notification, opportunity to be heard, and legal representation are provided.
Safeguard fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution, such as personal liberty under Article 21.
In the landmark case Jolly George Verghese v. Bank of Cochin (1980), the Supreme Court of India emphasized that courts must ensure prima facie case and procedural fairness before ordering extradition, protecting against arbitrary surrender.
Judicial review in extradition matters ensures India’s compliance with legal standards, international obligations, and constitutional safeguards. Courts act as a crucial guardian of individual rights while balancing India’s international commitments.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about public international law. Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
