Long arm of the law

THE premier of Victoria, Australia’s most densely populated state, has again raised the issue of extradition of an Indian citizen who was driving a car in that country and killed one person and seriously injured another. There seems little dispute about the facts of the case. The 19-year-old Indian who had gone to Australia to study hospitality, had a learner’s licence. On October 1, 2008, he was allegedly drunk and driving at 148 kmph when the accident occurred. He pleaded guilty to “culpable driving” but before his sentencing, fled Australia. 

The Indian national, Puneet, was arrested by the Punjab Police four years later and is now fighting his extradition in court. He is, perhaps, counting on the inevitably lengthy procedure of the court system, and the various possibilities of appeal against the verdict, to stay on in India indefinitely. He should not be allowed to do so. The courts need to deal with his pleas expeditiously. He must be returned to the country that he fled, illegally, on a “borrowed” passport, to be sentenced and to serve his term. 

Indian and Australia have a treaty that allows the extradition of individuals for crimes they committed even before the treaty was signed, as was this case. The matter being raised at the level of the state Premier underlines the sensitivity of the situation, and the Australians’ need for closure. India routinely seeks extradition from various countries, and in matters of diplomacy, reciprocity has great value. The criminal act of the individual must meet its logical consequence. He must face punishment for his crime and India, as well as its legal system, must not be seen as an impediment in the course of justice.