Diamantaire Nirav Modi, who was arrested in London in March 2019, was denied bail for the sixth time on Monday after the Westminster Magistrates Court refused to accept a ‘change of circumstances’ since his last request. .
The trial court has denied him bail four times; the High Court of England and Wales, as well as the Court of Appeals, had previously rejected similar requests. “There was a hearing to request bail today, it was not granted. The next hearing is scheduled for November 3, ”said a spokesman for the Westminster Magistrates Court.
Nirav Modi, 49, is being held at Wandsworth Prison, awaiting new hearings in his extradition case. The case was heard for five days in September and is scheduled for further hearings on November 3 and December 1 in magistrates court. Reasons cited by his legal team for requesting bail have included his worsening medical condition and threats against him in prison.
Modi has offered progressively higher amounts (4 million pounds in March) and follow stricter conditions as part of the bail packages, but the judges have rejected the requests on the grounds that it potentially poses a flight risk.
Modi is the subject of two extradition requests; one processed by the Central Investigations Directorate and the other by the Execution Directorate. Under UK extradition rules, the court must determine whether there is a prima facie case based on the material provided by the Indian government.
Also read: ‘Nirav Modi will not receive a fair trial in India’: former South Carolina judge Katju tells London court
The charges against Modi involve loans of more than Rs 11,300 crore made by the Mumbai branch of the Punjab National Bank (PNB) to its companies.
The CBI case accuses him of large-scale fraud by fraudulently obtaining loan agreements, formally known as Letters of Understanding (LOU); the ED case relates to the laundering of the proceeds of this alleged fraud.
The second extradition request was made on the basis of two additional offenses as part of the CBI case. It was certified by Home Secretary Priti Patel on February 20, as required by the 1993 UK-India extradition treaty.
The additional offenses relate to allegations that Modi interfered with the CBI investigation by “causing evidence to vanish” and intimidating witnesses (“criminal intimidation to cause death”).
The case of India is that Modi and his companies obtained loans without credit facilities; without providing the necessary cash margin; without proper documentation; without paying an adequate commission and LOUs are not correctly registered in the PNB systems; and whose proceeds were improperly diverted to repay previous loans and / or for the benefit of a series of related companies controlled by Modi.
The Indian government, which is represented in court by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), has argued that fraudulent LOUs would not have been issued without the active participation of co-defendant PNB agents.
.
