Alleged plot to kill Pannun: To stall extradition, Gupta told court in Prague to consider if Delhi gave orders

Gupta was detained by Czech authorities, at the request of the US government, shortly after he arrived in Prague on June 30 last year. Since then, the case pertaining to his extradition to the US, where he would be tried for allegedly plotting to kill Pannun, has been heard and decided by the Czech Municipal Court, High Court, and Constitutional Court.

On May 22, the Constitutional Court, country’s top court, dismissed Gupta’s challenge to the decisions of the Municipal Court in Prague dated November 23, 2023, and the High Court in Prague dated January 8, 2024, both of which had ruled positively on the admissibility of the US request for his extradition.

The Constitutional Court’s decision has paved the way for Gupta’s extradition, but the final call now rests with the Ministry of Justice.

Court documents show that as Gupta’s lawyers made a case against his extradition before the Prague High Court, they urged the court to check whether if their client was acting as a “soldier sui generis”  in eliminating a terrorist, who according to the Indian government, threatens India’s security similarly to how Osama bin Laden threatened the United States.

The High Court in Prague in its January 8 order, a copy of which is with The Sunday Express, shot down this argument stating that it found it unnecessary to consider whether the Gupta was obligated to comply with the murder demand due to his potential connections to his country’s secret services.

The High Court emphasised the absurdity of considering that a democratic state like India, adhering to the rule of law and international treaties, would resolve its issues in peacetime by murdering a citizen of another state, particularly when it maintains normal relations and has a legal assistance agreement with that state.

A similar argument was also made before the Czech top court, as shown by the Constitutional Court’s final order and the press release on the decision permitting Gupta’s extradition.

According to the English translation of the Czech press release shared with The Sunday Express by the spokesperson of the Constitutional Court, Gupta’s lawyer argued that the crime for which his extradition was requested by the US wasn’t just murder but also a political crime, which would pose a legal obstacle to his extradition.

“Neither the legal qualification of the crime nor the act itself or the circumstances of its commission suggest a political or military dimension. The argument that he was hired by an Indian government agent responsible for security matters, implying it was likely an assignment given by the Indian government (with the person committing the crime being a “soldier sui generis” eliminating a member of a terrorist movement), cannot be a reason preventing the complainant’s extradition. As the High Court stated, the complainant is not a political activist and the act was not aimed at changing the order of public affairs,” said the Constitutional Court’s release shared by spokesperson Kamila Abbasi.

When asked if Gupta’s lawyer in court implied that his client may have been hired by an Indian government agent while arguing that the extradition requested by the US was for an act of a military or political nature, Abbasi declined to speculate.

An email to Gupta’s lawyer Miroslav Krutina, who represented him in the Constitutional Court, seeking clarification on the argument that Gupta could have been hired by the Indian government to eliminate Pannun did not elicit a response.

Vít Tomáš, spokesperson of the Prague High Court, did not want to comment on the contents of the Prague High Court order since it hasn’t been made public.

US prosecutors have charged Gupta with attempting to hire a hitman to kill Pannun, a US citizen designated as a terrorist under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in India. Gupta had alleged human rights violations by Czech authorities while in custody, one of the issues that the Constitutional Court was to look into.

Last year, the US had shared information with the Indian government about the foiled assassination bid, also asking it to investigate the alleged involvement of the Indian official.

While the identity of the Indian official, referred to as CC1 in the indictment, was not revealed, a recent report by The Washington Post alleged that a former Indian intelligence officer plotted to kill Pannun on US soil. The Ministry of External Affairs had called the report “unwarranted and unsubstantiated”.