The legal saga of fugitive diamond merchant Mehul Choksi, a key accused in the multi-thousand-crore Punjab National Bank (PNB) fraud case, is set to enter a critical phase as Belgium’s highest court, the Court of Cassation, schedules the hearing of his appeal against extradition to India on December 9, 2025. The announcement was made on Thursday by officials familiar with the proceedings, highlighting the meticulous legal process unfolding in one of Europe’s most important judicial jurisdictions.

Choksi, who has been evading Indian authorities since 2018, is challenging the October 17, 2025, ruling of the Antwerp Court of Appeal, which upheld India’s extradition request and deemed it enforceable. The Antwerp Court of Appeal, in its decision, had examined prior rulings by the pre-trial chamber of the Antwerp District Court, Turnhout Division, which had initially deemed the arrest warrants issued by a special Mumbai court in May 2018 and June 2021 enforceable. In rejecting Choksi’s challenge, the Court of Appeal found that the businessman does not face any real risk of unfair treatment or denial of justice if extradited to India.

Speaking to PTI, Advocaat-generaal Henri Vanderlinden provided details on the procedural nuances of the Court of Cassation. “The Court of Cassation does not re-examine the facts of the case. It focuses solely on legal aspects, ensuring that the lower court correctly applied the law and followed due procedure. New evidence or facts cannot be introduced at this stage. The proceedings are largely written, and while oral arguments can be made to develop already stated complaints, no additional claims can be introduced during the hearing,” Vanderlinden explained.

The Supreme Court of Belgium functions as a court of law review rather than a fact-finding body. Its role is to ensure that the lower courts have acted within the boundaries of legal procedure and have interpreted statutes correctly. Choksi’s appeal, therefore, will be scrutinized for legal admissibility, procedural correctness, and compliance with both Belgian law and international human rights obligations.

The case against Choksi stems from one of India’s most notorious banking frauds. He is accused of masterminding a scam amounting to ₹13,000 crore in the PNB, a case in which the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleged that he personally siphoned off ₹6,400 crore. Choksi, who was living in India under scrutiny during the early stages of the investigation, fled to Antigua and Barbuda in January 2018, just days before the scam was detected. He was later located in Belgium, reportedly seeking medical treatment, which set the stage for India to initiate formal extradition proceedings.

India sent an official extradition request to Belgium on August 27, 2024, based on the warrants issued by the Mumbai special court. Subsequently, the public prosecutor at the Court of First Instance in Antwerp, Division Turnhout, took action on November 25, 2024, to enforce these arrest warrants. The pre-trial chamber of the Antwerp District Court, Turnhout Division, on November 29, 2024, ruled that the arrest warrants were enforceable, with the exception of the order related to the disappearance of evidence of the crime. Choksi’s subsequent appeal to the Antwerp Court of Appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the enforceability of India’s request.

Belgian courts took note of multiple assurances provided by the Indian government regarding Choksi’s safety, the legal process he would face, prison conditions, medical care, and his human rights. The Court of Appeal, in its verdict, emphasized that there is no “genuine risk” of Choksi being denied a fair trial or subjected to ill-treatment. It highlighted that the businessman’s claims of a politically motivated trial lacked substantiated evidence.

Choksi, who is 66 years old, has consistently argued that he faces personal risk, including allegations of political persecution. However, Belgian authorities have so far rejected these arguments, finding that the assurances provided by India are adequate to mitigate any concerns related to safety or fair treatment. The Court of Appeal specifically noted that Choksi had failed to provide “concretely plausible” evidence that he could be subjected to torture or any form of human rights violation upon return to India.

The Court of Cassation in Belgium, where the case will next be heard, does not allow for the introduction of new factual claims. As Vanderlinden explained, “The parties must convey all their complaints in writing at the time of the appeal. During the hearing, they can develop those complaints, but they cannot add anything new. If the court refuses the appeal, it is typically on legal grounds—for instance, the person filing the complaint may not have the legal competence to do so.” This ensures that the review focuses exclusively on procedural correctness and the application of law, rather than re-litigating the underlying facts of the case.

The Antwerp Court of Appeal’s ruling was significant not only in reinforcing India’s extradition request but also in affirming the credibility of the assurances provided by Indian authorities. The court concluded that Choksi’s submissions did not provide evidence to substantiate claims of political persecution or ill-treatment. The decision was viewed as a strong validation of India’s position, signaling that the judicial process in Belgium is aligned with international legal standards for extradition.

Mehul Choksi’s legal battle is part of a larger, complex network of extradition cases involving economic offenses, financial fraud, and high-profile fugitives. His case has attracted considerable media attention in both India and Europe, highlighting the interplay between international law, human rights considerations, and cross-border criminal justice cooperation. Legal experts suggest that the upcoming hearing in Belgium’s Supreme Court will likely focus on the meticulous application of extradition law, judicial procedures, and compliance with both Belgian and European Union legal frameworks.

The Choksi extradition case also underscores the challenges faced by Indian authorities in pursuing suspects across borders. India has repeatedly engaged with multiple countries to secure the return of high-profile economic offenders, emphasizing legal compliance, human rights safeguards, and diplomatic channels. In Choksi’s case, India’s assurances about fair trial, humane treatment, and medical provisions were central to convincing the Belgian courts of the legitimacy of the extradition request.

As of now, Choksi remains in Belgium, and his legal team is preparing for the December 9 hearing at the Court of Cassation. While the outcome of this review will not change the facts of the case, it could impact the timing and execution of his extradition if any procedural or legal errors are identified. Observers expect that the Belgian Supreme Court will carefully consider both the procedural legitimacy of the Antwerp Court of Appeal’s decision and the assurances provided by India before issuing its verdict.

In India, law enforcement agencies, including the CBI and Enforcement Directorate, are closely monitoring developments. Officials maintain that once extradition is secured, Choksi will face trial in India, which has been pending for several years. The case has broader implications for India’s efforts to hold economic offenders accountable and for international cooperation in combating financial crimes.

Choksi’s extradition saga also draws attention to the growing importance of transnational legal cooperation. Countries increasingly rely on treaties, legal assurances, and diplomatic channels to address cross-border crimes. The legal framework for extradition is inherently complex, balancing the rights of the accused with the imperative to uphold justice and accountability. The scrutiny by Belgian courts demonstrates the level of legal rigor applied to ensure that such extraditions comply with domestic and international norms.

As the December 9 hearing approaches, legal analysts suggest that Choksi’s appeal to the Court of Cassation will focus narrowly on alleged procedural irregularities or legal misapplications in the lower courts’ rulings. New evidence or factual claims regarding the PNB scam or his treatment in India are unlikely to be entertained at this stage. The court will primarily determine whether the Antwerp Court of Appeal correctly applied the law, adhered to due process, and respected Belgium’s obligations under international law.

Ultimately, the case of Mehul Choksi exemplifies the complex interplay between international legal systems, financial crime investigations, and the rights of fugitives. While the Belgian Supreme Court’s review will not reopen the underlying facts, it remains a pivotal step in the judicial process that will determine whether India can secure Choksi’s return to face trial for one of the country’s largest banking frauds.