Case helps perk up Indian paperwork in the British court

London judge’s ruling in businessman Vijay Mallya’s extradition case on December 10 may or may not be on the lines expected in New Delhi, but the case itself has changed for the better India’s ability to produce paperwork that holds up in British courts.

In previous extradition cases, bundles of poorly written first information reports (FIRs) and documents – many hand-written – used to arrive from India. Many were either unintelligible or of poor evidential quality, resulting in India’s cases invariably falling through in courts.

Officials say the case has been a “learning exercise” for ministries, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and other agencies. For the first time, there was “joined-up thinking” and much attention to detail in various quarters in New Delhi and London. One joint secretary in a key ministry was removed when there was a delay in producing a vital document that was to be submitted to the Westminster Magistrates Court. From the time when Indian bureaucracy was known for delays, the Mallya case has evidently brought about a change of approach.

The CBI responded “very well” this time, mainly due to the focus on the case by special director Rakesh Asthana. Deputy high commissioner Dinesh Patnaik steered the case from London until June, when he moved to New Delhi.

“Mallya’s case has been a learning exercise for us. We sat with lawyers of the Crown Prose- cution Service (CPS) to understand what is expected, in what form, in what kind of language, and we delivered,” a senior official involved with the case said.

“We started anticipating what the judge might ask, and prepared or provided paperwork before it was sought, such as sovereign assurances on no-deathsentence, human rights issues and prisons. No one had acted with such alacrity in the past,” he added. The better quality of documents included a change of language in the sovereign assurances - from verbose, bureaucratic generalities to specific commitments, while officials made efforts to ensure better videos of the Mumbai jail where Mallya is to be held, if extradited.

India submitted thousands of pages of documents that needed to be carted in trolleys. Mallya’s team produced a similar number of documents. Judge Emma Arbuthnot, who called the case a “jigsaw puzzle”, said it was “blindingly obvious” from the documents that banks had not followed their own rules while lending to Mallya’s companies.

Another official said: “The exercise has been good for us. A template has been created, now there is capacity to deal with other cases in the shape, form and language that is expected in British courts. It was very important for officials from Delhi to attend every Mallya hearing and understand the technicalities involved.” Since poor prison conditions was one of the key issues raised in previous extradition cases, barrack number 12 of Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai was quickly identified as meeting the required standards.

LONDON:A