Source: The Indian Express 

Introduction  

The U.S. Supreme Court has cleared the path for Tahawwur Hussain Rana's extradition to India. Tahawwur Hussain Rana, a 64-year-old former Pakistani military doctor and Canadian citizen, faces serious terrorism charges related to the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people and injured over 300. The Supreme Court's rejection of petition represents the culmination of years of legal proceedings across multiple U.S. courts. 

What Was Tahawwur Hussain Rana's Role in Terrorism-Related Activities and His Legal Consequences? 

• Tahawwur Hussain Rana established First World Immigration Services in Chicago with a branch in Mumbai. U.S. authorities convicted him in 2011 for providing material support to Lashkar-e-Taiba between 2005-2009 and for supporting a planned attack against a Danish newspaper.  
• He was acquitted of directly supporting the Mumbai attacks. 
• David Headley, Tahawwur Hussain Rana's co-conspirator and a key figure in the attacks, testified that Rana provided him with a business visa for India in 2006 along with financial support.  
• Headley claimed Tahawwur Hussain Rana's Mumbai office helped identify targets for the terrorist organization.  
• Headley's testimony has been inconsistent regarding when Rana became aware of the attack plans. 
• U.S. authorities sentenced Rana to 14 years imprisonment with 5 years of supervised release. He received early release in 2020 due to health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

What Legal Arguments and Court Decisions Shaped Tahawwur Hussain Rana's Extradition Case? 

• India submitted its formal extradition request in December 2019, followed by a request for Rana's provisional arrest in June 2020.  
• The Biden administration supported this request under the 1997 U.S.-India Extradition Treaty. 
• Tahawwur Hussain Rana's primary legal defense centered on Article 6 of the treaty, which prevents extradition when a person "has been convicted or acquitted in the Requested State for the offense for which extradition is required." He argued his U.S. acquittal on Mumbai attack charges should block extradition. 
• U.S. courts consistently rejected this argument. The District Court ruled in May 2023 that the Indian charges contained different elements from those adjudicated in the U.S. The Appeals Court (August 2024) and Supreme Court (January 2025) upheld this decision. Justice Elena Kagan rejected Rana's stay application on 6th March 2025. 
• Tahawwur Hussain Rana has filed a final stay application with Chief Justice John Roberts, claiming potential torture in India would violate the U.N. Convention Against Torture. 

What are the Charges and Legal Proceedings Against Tahawwur Hussain Rana in India? 

• India's National Investigation Agency filed charges against Rana in 2011. These charges include: 
  • Murder and conspiracy to wage war against India (Indian Penal Code, 1860). 
  • Conspiracy to commit terrorist acts (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967) 
• Indian legal proceedings have remained on hold since the accused were declared absconding in 2014. Indian law traditionally prohibited trials in absentia, though recent legal reforms have modified this restriction. 
• Upon Tahawwur Hussain Rana's arrival, the NIA Special Court can immediately commence trial proceedings. The charges carry potential penalties of life imprisonment or death. Any verdict may be appealed through India's higher courts. 

What are the Legal Provisions in Relation to Extradition? 

Extradition 

• Extradition has been defined by the Supreme Court as the delivery on the part of one State to another of those whom it is desired to deal with for crimes of which they have been accused or convicted and are justifiable in the Courts of the other State. 
• The law relating to extradition in India is governed by the Extradition Act, 1962 and the Extradition treaties obtained between India and other countries. 
• The Extradition Act, 1962 applies to both the extraditing persons to India and from India to foreign countries. 
• As per the Section 34 of this Act, India has extra-territorial jurisdiction, that is, an extradition offence committed by any person in a Foreign State shall be deemed to have been committed in India and such person shall be liable to be prosecuted in India for such offence. 
• Section 2(c) of this Act, extradition offence means - 
  • In relation to a foreign State, being a treaty State, an offence provided for in the extradition treaty with that State. 
  • In relation to a foreign State other than a treaty State an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year under the laws of India or of a foreign State and includes a composite offence. 
• Section 2(d) of this Act defines an Extradition Treaty as a Treaty, Agreement or Arrangement made by India with a Foreign State, relating to the extradition of fugitive criminals which extends to and is binding on India. 
• Extradition treaties are traditionally bilateral in character. 
• Extradition treaties can be initiated in the case of under-investigation, under-trial and convicted criminals. 
• At present, India has extradition treaties with 48 countries and extradition arrangement with 12 countries. 

Principles Governing Extradition 

• Principle of Double Criminality: 
  • This principle, also known as Dual Criminality states, that extradition is available only when the act in question is an offense in the jurisdictions of both the States (the requesting State and the State requested). 
• Principle of Specialty aka Specificity: 
  • The requesting State pledges to judge the requested person only for the crime for which extradition was requested, and not for any other offence. 
• Political Exception: 
  • Extradition must be declined if the real purpose of the request made is to punish the person requested for his political opinion rather than for the crime committed by him. 
  • The term political offences have not been clearly defined in international law.