A dramatic diplomatic and legal battle is unfolding as Bangladesh formally seeks the extradition of its ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who has been sentenced to death by the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT). With Dhaka insisting on her immediate return and New Delhi confirming that the issue is now under “legal and judicial examination,” the central question emerges: Can India legally refuse to send Hasina back?
Current treaties, Indian domestic law and the political nature of the charges together suggest that New Delhi has significant discretion to deny the request if it finds the process unfair, politically motivated or contrary to the principles of justice.
INDIA SAYS THE MATTER IS LEGAL NOT POLITICAL
India’s initial reaction has been measured. The Foreign Secretary stated that the issue is “purely legal and judicial,” requiring consultations between both governments before any decision is made. The statement reflects New Delhi’s caution amid the extraordinary political churn in Bangladesh, where the ICT verdict against Hasina and her former home minister has triggered massive unrest.
Following the conviction, Dhaka witnessed a sweeping crackdown with the deployment of police, army and paramilitary forces. Given the volatile situation and the nature of the charges allegedly linked to handling of 2024 protests questions arise over whether the verdict carries political overtones that could influence India’s decision.
Legal experts note that India’s Extradition Act, 1962 gives the Central Government substantial powers to accept, reject, or delay extradition based on national interest and justice considerations.
Section 29 of the Act lays out specific grounds on which India can refuse extradition. The government can legally deny the request if:
• the demand appears trivial or not made in good faith
• the charge is politically motivated
• the extradition is not in the interest of justice
The law even allows the Centre to halt proceedings at any stage, cancel warrants, or discharge the accused person.
Even more crucially, Section 31 prohibits extradition when the person sought is being targeted for a political offence, or when prosecution in the requesting state is barred by limitation.
Section 31(c) adds that India must receive a guarantee that the accused will be tried strictly for the offence mentioned in the extradition request, unless India consents otherwise. A failure to provide this assurance is grounds for refusal.
The India–Bangladesh Extradition Treaty introduces another layer of protection through its political offence exception.
Article 6 allows either country to refuse extradition if the alleged crime is political. However, the treaty clarifies that severe offences like murder, terrorism, bombing, firearms crimes, kidnapping and major assaults cannot be reclassified as political. Whether Hasina’s alleged charges fall into political or non-political categories will become central to India’s evaluation.
Article 7 gives India the option to prosecute Hasina domestically instead of extraditing her. If New Delhi chooses not to prosecute, only then does the extradition request return for reconsideration.
Under Article 8, extradition must be refused if:
• the accusation is trivial
• too much time has passed
• the request lacks good faith
• the offence is purely military
• the person was previously convicted but not sentenced
Article 21 further clarifies that the treaty is exclusively bilateral the UN or the International Court of Justice (ICJ) cannot intervene unless both countries consent. Either side can terminate the treaty with six months’ notice, ensuring that any decision ultimately remains a sovereign matter between India and Bangladesh.
As Bangladesh initiates formal extradition procedures, India is now required to examine the request strictly through legal, treaty-based, and humanitarian standards. With Hasina facing a death sentence, alleging political targeting, and the situation in Dhaka under intense military clampdown, New Delhi holds multiple legal avenues to refuse extradition if it finds the request unjust, oppressive, or politically influenced.
The Foreign Secretary’s comments confirm that India will not rush into a decision. The process will hinge on consultations, legal vetting and a careful evaluation of whether the extradition aligns with India’s laws, treaty obligations, and broader democratic principles.
