London: It has surfaced that the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCIF), which has supervisory, advisory and processing roles over INTERPOL – the international criminal police organisation – concluded as far back as October 12, 2022 that Mehul Choksi, the fugitive Indian jewellery magnate who is now a citizen of Antigua and Barbuda, was extra-judicially kidnapped in the Caribbean in May 2021 by the Narendra Modi government in a bid to rendition him to India.In other words, the Modi dispensation allegedly attempted to bypass due process to forcibly bring him to India.The CCIF’s determination was presented as evidence on December 18, 2025 by Choksi’s British barrister, Edward Fitzgerald, a King’s Counsel or senior advocate, in the form of a statement by the fugitive mega-jeweller’s Belgian lawyer, Simon Bekaert, to the High Court of England and Wales in London. This is a case in which Choksi has accused the Modi administration of kidnap and torture.Bekaert stated that the CCIF concluded that “his (Choksi’s) abductors told him they were RAW (Research & Analysis Wing) agents, a telephone call with [one] Mr Narendra Singh while on the boat that was heading him to Dominica threatening him and his family if he did not voluntarily return to India (to face justice), the presence of the same investigator on-board the plane to Dominica to recover him, the link between Mr Gurdip Bath (a co-accused with the Indian government in the London case) and the Prime Ministers of India and of Antigua”.The statement went on to say, “Consequently, it (CCIF) discerns that there is credible possibility that the Applicant’s abduction from Antigua to Dominica had the ultimate purpose of deporting the Applicant to India, and resolves this creates a strong doubt as to the possibility for the Applicant to receive a fair treatment or trial if returned to India.”Following that determination, INTERPOL’s Red Corner Notice (RCN, a request to law enforcement worldwide to locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition, surrender or similar legal action) against Choksi — triggered at India’s request in 2018 — was withdrawn in 2023.Modi once famously hailed Choksi as ‘Mehul bhai’ at a public event in India. The latter alleged they gradually fell out after he refused to donate money to the BJP’s election coffers in 2014.Now, challenging his arrest in Belgium, where he has been in detention since April, Choksi complained at two levels of appeal that the Belgian prosecutor had failed to provide the Belgian courts with the CCIF’s decision and that deletion of Interpol’s RCN ought to invalidate the Belgian arrest warrant against him. But the courts concerned ignored the alleged lapse on the prosecutor’s part.Therefore, the first stage of hearing connected with his extradition to India – as sought by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) – will commence sometime in the New Year. This is contrary to the widespread impression created that Choksi’s extradition has been approved by Belgium and his arrival in India is imminent.In London, Fitzgerald exhibited a letter from Bekaert which said, “I estimate that it will take between 2 years and 4 years from today before the extradition proceedings are finished before the Council of State (the third and final stage of the Belgian judicial system).” Even if Choksi loses at all stages, he would still be entitled, according to Bekaert, to apply for asylum, which ‘would take several months to more than one year’. That does not take into account approaching the European Court of Human Rights.The December 18 hearing in London was insisted upon after the Indian government and five other accused failed to stop proceedings going ahead when it was first heard in June. Their objections on grounds of diplomatic immunity or lack of jurisdiction or both were at the time rejected.Choksi alleges that five British nationals or residents acted as agents of the Modi government to carry out his abduction from Antigua and his subsequent forcible transportation on a boat to Dominica.Before substantive arguments on merits can begin, four of the five – Bath, Leslie Farrow-Guy, Gurmit Singh and Gurjit Bhandal – have demanded that Choksi deposit ‘security for costs’ of £800,000 with the court to cover their expenses in the event that he loses.However, barrister Gary Summers and lawyer Susana Ferrin’s petitions on behalf of Bath and Farrow-Guy and Singh and Bhandal respectively hit a rough patch in court. It emerged that an ‘investigative report’ by an individual named Kenneth Rijock, a United States citizen, submitted by the defence as an ‘impartial amicus curiae’, was actually from a man convicted of fraud and racketeering in America.Besides, Rijock had shockingly reached out to one of Choksi’s lawyers, Michael Polak, offering to switch sides. He originally put out a story saying Choksi was not kidnapped but apprehended while attempting to escape to Cuba, which a section of the media in India ran with.In the course of his argument, Choksi’s counsel Fitzgerald dramatically produced a witness statement from Polak, which read that on August 4, 2025. he received an unsolicited message from Rijock which said, ‘As you know, I am the author of an extensive 2023 investigative report on your client, which I have sent to the (London High) Court as a public service… I have recently been contacted and advised that my services are going to be requested, in the capacity of expert witness, by a party adverse to Mr Choksi… I know that the kidnapping of your client did indeed occur… I would like to give you the opportunity to engage my services, before I receive this other offer.’Screenshot of WhatsApp conversations (phone number redacted) between Kenneth Rijock and Michael Polak. Credit: By arrangementOn August 6, 2025, Rijock messaged Polak again. This time, he communicated, ‘My offer to act as your client’s expert witness in Choksi v. Govt of India et al will expire at 1700 hrs today.’Polak’s statement underlined, ‘I did not respond to any of the messages from Mr Rijock.’Screenshot of WhatsApp messages sent by Kenneth Rijock to Michael Polak (numbers redacted). Photo: By arrangement.The fifth member of the group that Choksi accuses of organising his kidnapping – a Hungarian woman by the name of Barbara Jarabik, who allegedly laid a honey-trap by inviting Choksi to her flat in Antigua, where he was apparently pounced upon by around eight men – continues to be unrepresented in the case. She had indicated in June she cannot financially afford to defend herself.The Indian government did not participate in the demand for security costs from Choksi, though it had an observer in barrister Jacob Turner, who told the court that India would seek immunity and question jurisdiction if and when a full hearing takes place.Justice Gavin Mansfield, presiding over the matter, reserved his judgement on the demand for security costs until at least the end of January.