**
The Delhi High Court has sought responses from the Central government and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a petition filed by Christian Michel, the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam. Michel has contested the legality of his 2018 extradition from the UAE, arguing that the India-UAE extradition treaty was not properly ratified. This challenge introduces a new legal hurdle in the high-profile corruption case involving politicians, businessmen, and defence officials.
AgustaWestland Scam: A Quick Recap
The scam revolves around alleged bribes worth ₹423 crore paid by UK-based AgustaWestland to secure a ₹3,600-crore contract for supplying 12 VVIP helicopters to the Indian Air Force (2010). Michel, a British national, was accused of orchestrating kickbacks to Indian officials. Extradited in December 2018, he remains in Tihar Jail facing money laundering and corruption charges.
Michel’s Legal Argument: Was the Extradition Valid?
Michel’s petition claims his extradition was unlawful because the India-UAE treaty lacked proper ratification under UAE’s constitutional process. His lawyer, Vijay Aggarwal, argued:
“The UAE never ratified this treaty domestically, making Michel’s extradition legally untenable.”
The plea demands his release and a judicial declaration that the extradition violated due process.
Court’s Response & Next Steps
The High Court issued notices to:
– Ministry of External Affairs (MEA)
– Enforcement Directorate (ED)
– Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Responses are due in four weeks, with the next hearing slated for October 2024. Legal experts warn a ruling in Michel’s favor could undermine other India-UAE extraditions.
Broader Implications
- Political Fallout: The case has implicated high-profile figures, with Michel’s alleged “coded entries” referencing politicians.
- Treaty Scrutiny: Questions arise about India’s verification of international treaties before enforcement.
- Precedent Risk: If successful, the challenge may embolden other extradition defendants.
What’s Ahead?
The government will likely counter that UAE’s internal procedures don’t invalidate the treaty’s binding nature for India. Meanwhile, Michel’s legal team continues pursuing multiple appeals.
Conclusion
This challenge tests the legal robustness of India’s extradition framework. A ruling against the government could expose gaps in cross-border judicial cooperation, impacting future cases.
Follow [Publication Name] for real-time updates.
**
