274 Fugitives Brought Back to India in Past Seven Years: MHA

Syllabus: GS2/Governance, GS3/Economy

Context

• As per the Ministry of Home Affairs, India has brought back 274 fugitive criminals from 36 countries between 2019 and 2026.

What is a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO)?

• A Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) is a person:
  • Against whom an arrest warrant has been issued for committing a scheduled economic offence involving ₹100 crore or more, and
  • Who has left India to avoid criminal prosecution or refuses to return to face the legal process.
• It is defined under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018.
• A director or deputy director (appointed under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) may file an application before a special court (designated under the 2002 Act) to declare a person as a fugitive economic offender.  

Key Features of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018

• Confiscation of Property: The Act empowers authorities to attach and confiscate properties of the offender located both in India and abroad.
  • The law also covers benami properties and assets indirectly controlled by the offender.
• Bar on Civil Claims: The Act disallows declared FEOs from initiating or defending any civil claims in Indian courts.
• Special Court Mechanism: The Act provides for adjudication of cases through special courts established under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

What is Extradition?

• Extradition is the recognised international mechanism for the timely return of fugitives from foreign countries. 
• It is defined as the “delivery of an accused or convicted individual from the country he is found in, to another country that requests his extradition”.
• The process is governed by treaties and agreements which adopt internationally recognised legal principles for the surrender of fugitives.

Structural Challenges in Extradition

• Judicial Scrutiny in Foreign Jurisdictions: Foreign courts independently examine extradition requests, prison conditions and human rights safeguards in the requesting country.
  • These assessments frequently prolong or obstruct extradition proceedings involving Indian requests.
• Asylum and Political Protection Claims: Many fugitives claim political persecution or seek asylum in host countries, transforming criminal proceedings into complex legal and humanitarian disputes. 
• Absence of Treaties with Certain Jurisdictions: Several fugitives reside in countries with which India does not have extradition treaties, limiting India’s ability to secure their return through legal compulsion.
• Outdated Treaty Structures: Older treaties follow a restrictive list system, which excludes modern crimes such as cybercrime and complex financial fraud.

Governance and Security Implications

• Impact on Rule of Law: Low extradition outcomes weaken deterrence against economic and transnational crimes and encourage offenders to evade domestic legal processes by fleeing abroad.
• Internal Security and Financial Integrity: Delayed extradition hampers India’s efforts to combat money laundering, corruption, and organized crime, while also undermining public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Government Initiatives

• BHARATPOL: The Government launched BHARATPOL, connecting more than one thousand 4 hundred agencies with INTERPOL, reducing the time required for information sharing to 3 to 10 days. 
• Use of Technology: The government used satellite technology and digital footprints to geo-locate fugitive criminals hiding abroad after changing their names and identities through Operation Trishul.
• Provisions in Criminal Laws: The government implemented three new criminal laws, incorporating special provisions relating to fugitive offenders.
  • For the first time, Sections 355 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) provide for trial in absentia, enabling the entire judicial process, from trial to prosecution—to be completed even in the absence of a fugitive accused.
• The constitution of a Standing Focus Group under the Multi Agency Centre (MAC) of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) in 2026 marks a significant institutional step in strengthening India’s fugitive management framework.
  • The Group is responsible for prioritising fugitive cases, standardising dossiers, bridging information gaps, ensuring sustained follow-up with foreign partners, and providing national-level support to cases initiated by State agencies. 

Way Ahead

• India needs to expand its extradition treaty network, especially with major financial centres, and pursue sustained diplomatic engagement to expedite pending cases.
• Improving prison infrastructure, ensuring timely trials, and reinforcing procedural safeguards are needed to address concerns raised by foreign courts and strengthen India’s extradition credibility.

Source: TH