Fugitive diamantaire
Nirav Modi’s mental health along with the prison conditions in India were once
again at the forefront on Wednesday during the ongoing extradition hearing in connection
with the Punjab National Bank (PNB) scam case at a UK court.

The defence
laid out arguments against a prima facie case of fraud and money laundering
against Modi on the third day of the five-day hearing at the London’s Westminster
Magistrates’ Court, presided over by Justice Samuel Gooze, PTI reported.

Also Read: Nirav Modi faces suicide risk, politically biased trial in India: Lawyers tell UK court

Led by
barrister Clare Montgomery, the defence team of the 49-year-old jeweler, who observed
the court proceedings via live videolink from London’s Wandsworth Prison,
raised issues against the conditions at Barrack 12 at Mumbai’s Arthur Road Jail,
where he will be lodged upon extradition. 

The defence
claimed the barrack has been entirely covered in a blue metallic cover since it
housed a terrorist in 2007, making it “incredibly hot”. Additionally, other
problems such as damp, dust, insects and rodents were also highlighted by the
defence.

Apart from
fears related to a COVID-19 outbreak earlier this year, the defence referred to
a medical expert’s “addendum report”, which highlighted “much more serious”
concerns around Modi’s mental health.

A set of defence
witnesses, including the medical expert and UK-based prisons expert Dr Alan
Mitchell, who has previously given witness statements in the extradition case
of liquor baron Vijay Mallya, are slated to give live evidence in the court
later this week.

Also Read: Nirav Modi’s 5-day extradition trial resumes in UK court

They will
be cross-examined by Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) barrister Helen Malcolm,
who is representing the Indian government.

During the
hearing on Wednesday, Modi’s defence also argued that their client has been
subjected to a “trial by media” and would not receive a fair trial in India.

The defence
also briefly presented written statements of Indian High Court judge Abhay
Thipsay to highlight arguments against the creibility of certain evidence
presented by the government of India.

Thipsay’s
testimony questions whether the statements by the Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) are in line with the “statutory
requirements” under Indian Law and raises doubts over whether certain alleged
actions, such as the destruction of mobile phones, “amount to disappearance of
evidence”.

Modi is subjected
to two different criminal proceedings, one by the CBI for the alleged fraud
committed against PNB and the other by the ED, in connection with the
laundering of the proceeds of that fraud.

An additional
extradition request was made in February this year in connection with two
additional offences involving the disappearance of evidence and intimidating a witness.

Also Read: A peek into luxurious lives of Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi in Netflix show ‘Bad Boy Billionaires’

The CPS needs
to establish a prima facie case against Modi to allow the judge to rule that he
has a case to answer in Indian courts. If the judge rules in favour of the
Indian government, UK Home Secretary Priti Patel can then certify the
extradition to India to stand trial.

A ruling in
the case is not expected till the end of the year or early next year, as a
final submissions hearing has been slated for December 1.