By imposing costs of 104 euros on Choksi, the court confirmed the position of the Indictment Chamber of the Antwerp Court of Appeal, which had determined that the documentation provided by Choksi was insufficient to demonstrate in concrete terms that he runs a real, present and serious risk of being subjected to blatant denial of justice or to torture or inhuman and degrading treatment in the requesting State.
The Court of Cassation does not re-examine the facts or decide whether extradition is fair or sensible. His role is limited to checking whether the law was correctly applied and whether procedural rules and reasoning obligations were respected.
If the lower courts applied the correct legal standards and provided reasons, the Supreme Court should dismiss the appeal even if the outcome is controversial, officials said. The Supreme Court order accessed by PTI shows that Choksi had based his arguments on the Indictment Chamber’s position on his claims about an alleged kidnap attempt from Antigua, the Interpol File Control Commission (CCF)’s position on the alleged incident, media reporting and the possibility of not getting a fair trial on the case in India. grounds for violation of the presumption of innocence, among other arguments.
The CCF had removed Choksi’s name from the Interpol Red Notice list in November 2022 based on his appeal. The CCF is a separate Interpol body that is “not under the control” of the Interpol Secretariat and is staffed mainly by elected lawyers from different countries, where people can challenge decisions to declare them fugitives.
Choksi’s argument that the prosecutor withheld information about the CCF’s findings on his attempted kidnapping from Antigua from the preliminary inquiry chamber of the Antwerp court, which had ratified the court orders in Mumbai, also found no support at the apex court in Belgium.
Even if the person was not summoned and even if the Interpol CCF decision was not initially filed, his defense rights were still adequately protected because he could appeal, the court noted.
It said the Indictment Chamber had full appellate jurisdiction, heard the case on an adversarial basis and examined all documents, including the CCF decision.
As long as the person can fully argue his case on appeal, there is no violation of the law, even if the procedure at first instance was imperfect, the Supreme Court in Belgium said.
The Court of Cassation found no flaw in the findings of the Prosecution Chamber, which had upheld a lower court order dated November 29, 2024, declaring as ‘enforceable’ the arrest warrants issued by a special court in Mumbai in May 2018 and June 2021, paving the way for Choksi’s extradition.
It noted that the judgment of the Indictment Chamber answers and rejects the applicant’s defense set out in the appeal, without having to respond to every argument put forward in support of this defense, without constituting a separate defense.
She also justified the decision that the grounds for refusal of Article 2a, paragraph 2, of the Extradition Act 1874 (concerning possible torture) do not apply by operation of law, as evidenced by the order given in Dutch.
The court was presided over by Filip Van Volsem, Section President Erwin Francis and Justices Eric Van Dooren, Bruno Lietaert and Jos Decoker.
Choksi had fled India in the first week of January 2018, days before the Rs 13,000 crore fraud at PNB was discovered.
At the request of the CBI and the ED, Interpol included his name in the list of most wanted fugitives, called Red Notice, in December 2018.
Of the Rs 13,000-crore scam, Choksi alone siphoned off Rs 6,400 crore, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has alleged in its chargesheet.
Choksi was spotted in Belgium, where he reportedly arrived for treatment.
India had sent an extradition request to Belgium on August 27, 2024, on the basis of arrest warrants issued by the special court in Mumbai.
The public prosecutor at the Court of First Instance in Antwerp, Turnhout department, initiated proceedings on November 25, 2025 with a view to the execution of arrest warrants issued by the court in Mumbai.
The Pre-Trial Chamber of the Antwerp District Court, Turnhout Division, in its order dated November 29, 2024, stated that the arrest warrants issued by the Mumbai Court against Choksi were enforceable, with the exception of the warrant related to “causing the disappearance of evidence of the crime”.
India has given Belgium a number of guarantees regarding Choksi’s safety, the charges he would face during his trial in India, prison arrangements, human rights and medical needs.
Published on December 18, 2025
#Belgian #Supreme #Court #rejects #Mehul #Choksis #appeal #paving #extradition #India