Premium

AgustaWestland case: Delhi HC declines to hear Christian Michel’s plea on India-UAE extradition treaty provision

While Christian Michel James has been granted bail in both cases, James has refused to furnish bail bonds citing “security reasons."

The Centre told the Delhi High Court it cannot order a GST cut on air purifiers, arguing the issue lies with the GST Council and court intervention would breach separation of powers.The Centre told the Delhi High Court it cannot order a GST cut on air purifiers, arguing the issue lies with the GST Council and court intervention would breach separation of powers.

Christian Michel James, the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper “scam” case, withdrew his plea from the Delhi High Court challenging a provision of the India-UAE extradition treaty after the court Monday indicated that it is not inclined to entertain it.

While allowing him to withdraw the plea, the court granted him liberty to file a fresh petition with amended prayers.

James, in his latest plea before the HC, sought that the court declare his continued detention in judicial custody illegal, since he has already completed the maximum punishment possible for the offences he has been accused of — even as the trial remains pending.

The extraordinary treaty between India and UAE was notified in July 2000. James, before a Delhi trial court earlier, had submitted that he is entitled for benefit under Article 19 of the extradition treaty. This states that the term of provisional remand shall be remitted from any sentence passed in the requesting state against the person to be extradited.

Challenging the constitutional validity of the treaty, James argued that the application of Article 17 of the treaty, which bars the trial of an extradited person for offences other than those for which they were extradited, must be understood in the context of Section 21 of the Extradition Act. Section 21 states that an accused or convicted person, surrendered or returned by a foreign State, is not to be tried for certain offences.

When the plea was taken up before a bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Manoj Jain, it orally remarked to James’s counsel, Aljo K Joseph, that his petition should be asking for specific relief and urged him to withdraw and file a fresh petition.

“There has to be a cause of action… we’re not here to solve your problems… Once it has not yet been passed by Parliament, it is not to be followed, it’s not even a law at this point… Once it’s not a law (the extradition treaty), there’s no question of declaring it ultra vires (unconstitutional). A proposed bill can’t be declared ultra vires,” Justice Chaudhary orally remarked.

Story continues below this ad

James, who was extradited from Dubai in December 2018, was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) immediately upon landing in India. The Enforcement Directorate arrested him as well.

He was accused of being a ‘middleman’ in India’s defence deal with UK-based AgustaWestland, allegedly paying large sums of bribes to IAF officers, Defence Ministry officials, bureaucrats and politicians via the firm.

The CBI has claimed that undue favour was granted to AgustaWestland in lieu of the illegal gratification. The ED also booked James on money-laundering charges

While he has been granted bail in both cases, James has refused to furnish bail bonds citing “security reasons”. He has been imprisoned in Delhi’s Tihar jail since 2018. His passport has also expired.

Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More

 

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement