Former UK Home Secretary Priti Patel has claimed that India refused to accept deportations of illegal migrants from Britain as leverage in a dispute over the extradition of Nirav Modi, the diamantaire wanted in India for alleged fraud. Patel, who served as home secretary between 2019 and 2022, made this allegation in recent comments, suggesting that New Delhi used migrant returns as a bargaining tool to pressure London over Modi’s case.
Patel had approved Modi’s extradition in 2021, but the process faced delays. Modi, accused of defrauding Punjab National Bank of over 13,000 crore rupees, fought the extradition through British courts. According to Patel’s claim, India signalled it would not cooperate on accepting deportations of Indian nationals living illegally in the UK during the period when Modi’s extradition was stalled. This practice, if true, would represent a significant diplomatic friction between the two countries over a high-profile financial crime case.
The claim highlights how extradition cases can become entangled with broader diplomatic relationships. India and Britain have formal agreements requiring each country to accept the return of its own nationals who are in the other country illegally. Such returns are routine administrative matters handled through immigration procedures. If India deliberately withheld cooperation on this front, it would suggest using migration policy as political pressure.
Modi’s extradition case became one of the most closely watched legal battles between the UK and India. He had fled India in 2018 after the fraud allegations surfaced, eventually reaching London. The British courts examined India’s legal case for over two years before approving extradition. Modi has since returned to India and faces legal proceedings.
Patel’s disclosure raises questions about whether India’s government used every available lever, including cooperation on routine migration matters, to maintain pressure during negotiations around Modi’s case. The allegation suggests that extradition disputes can spill over into other areas of bilateral cooperation, affecting ordinary processes like migrant deportations.
The timing of Patel’s comments comes as both countries continue to manage their relationship across multiple issues including trade, security and law enforcement. Neither the Indian government nor Patel has provided detailed documentation of the specific instances she is referring to, leaving the full scope of the alleged non-cooperation unclear.
Source: Mint
