The Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Shankesh Mutha, an Indian citizen facing extradition proceedings in connection with a criminal case lodged against him in Thailand for the alleged theft of diamonds worth ₹3.89 crore.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, in an order passed on July 1, noted that Mutha had remained available to authorities and consistently demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with the extradition inquiry. The court observed that the pending extradition request could be processed within the existing legal framework without infringing upon his right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“Section 438 of the CrPC is not merely a statutory remedy; it is a procedural safeguard flowing directly from the constitutional command that no person shall be deprived of liberty except by just, fair, and reasonable procedure established by law,” the court stated.
The court rejected the argument that anticipatory bail is barred under the Extradition Act, observing that the statute contains no such prohibition. “To read such a prohibition into the statute would amount to judicially engrafting a limitation that the legislature, in its wisdom, chose not to impose,” the judge said.
Mutha had approached the High Court after a trial court rejected his anticipatory bail plea under the new Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), read with the Extradition Act. The High Court, however, found merit in his claim that he was unaware of any criminal case in Thailand at the time of his return to India after working there for eight years with Flawless Co. Ltd., a Bangkok-based company.
The company accused Mutha of stealing eight diamonds in 2021, prompting the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court to issue an arrest warrant, and the Thai prosecutors to initiate extradition proceedings. The matter is currently pending before a magistrate in Delhi’s Patiala House Courts.
The High Court pointed to Mutha’s conduct, including his voluntary appearances before the magistrate and submission of his passport to the registrar, to rule out the possibility of him being a flight risk or tampering with evidence.
“In the prima facie opinion of this court, the petitioner has demonstrated bona fide intent to co-operate in the inquiry proceedings,” the court held, setting aside the lower court’s order and granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Justice Narula also emphasised that while the Extradition Act serves a specialised function in enabling India’s international obligations in criminal justice cooperation, it cannot override constitutionally embedded safeguards unless explicitly stated.
