Extradition proceedings would not take into strict account provisions of procedural and evidentiary law, the Supreme Court has ruled.A bench of Justice S B Sinha and Justice Harjit Singh Bedi said an extradition is governed by the Extradition Act and bilateral treaties between the countries involved, and such a case is not brought before a designated court by a prosecutor or a complainant but by the Centre. Therefore, its functions are quasi-judiciary and its reports not a definitive order. The court’s finding is only for the purpose of extradition or discharge of an accused based on a prima facie view.“The Extradition Act only envisages taking of such evidence as may be produced in support of the requisition of the foreign state as also on behalf of the fugitive.. The meaning of the word “evidence” stricto sensu is not applicable in a proceeding under the Act. Moreover the Act being a special statute, it shall, prevail over the provisions of a general statute like the Code of Criminal Procedure,” the bench observed.The ruling came on appeal from Sarabjit Rick Singh, whose extradition the US government has sought, stating that he was wanted in Texas for drug trafficking and money laundering.Singh was arrested in India and an inquiry was conducted, after which the court recommended extradition. A petition against the legality and validity of the order was dismissed by Delhi High Court.His appeal to Supreme Court submitted that the extradition order suffered from procedural lapses in that it was passed on the basis of material that would not constitute “evidence” within the meaning of the Extradition Act, and that under CrPC the records of the US case were to be placed before the court here.The bench dismissed the appeal saying such detailed procedure was not required.
