UK Court Rejects Nirav Modi Bail Plea On PNB Fraud Accused

London, April 26: Nirav Modi will remain in prison as his bail plea was again rejected by a United Kingdom court on Friday. UK court rejects Nirav Modi bail, rejecting the bail plea from Nirav Modi, the court of the Magistrates of Westminster extended his custody until May 24.

Nirav Modi, who is a defendant in the fraud and money laundering case of the USD 1 billion Punjab National Bank (PNB), appear before a judge via a video link from the prison.

On March 29, Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot rejected Modi’s bail on the grounds that there was a “significant risk that he would not surrender.” “This is a case of substantial fraud, losing between USD 1-2 billion to a bank in India.

I am not convince that the conditional bail sought in this case will meet the concerns of the Indian government,” Judge Arbuthnot noted in her ruling.

UK Court Rejects Nirav Modi Bail

UK Court Rejects Nirav Modi Bail

Arbuthnot is the same judge who last December ordered the extradition of Vijay Mallya, former Kingfisher Airlines boss.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had appeared on behalf of the Indian authorities in opposition to Modi’s bail. “There is a real risk that he will be able to flee, interfere with witnesses, interfere with evidence,” said the prosecution.

Modi can apply for a third bail at the Court of Westminster Magistrates, but only if there are substantially different grounds for the bail plea.

Modi’s legal team, including solicitor Anand Doobay and barrister Clare Montgomery, had previously offered 1 million pounds as security alongside an offer to meet stringent restrictions on the movement of their client’s electronic tags, “just like house arrest.”

It emerges on last month’s hearing that Modi has threat witnesses with death and also trying to destroy evidence such as mobile phones and a server holding “substances critical to the fraud.” His defense team, like the one deploys in his extradition case by former Kingfisher Airlines boss Vijay Mallya, denies the allegations and says that their client views the United Kingdom as a “haven where his case will be considered fairly.”