French woman's extradition: HC notice to Centre

The Delhi High Court today sought the Centre's response on a French woman's plea challenging the notification of a 118-year-old extradition treaty between the UK and Chile, under which proceedings have been initiated to extradite her to the South American nation.
Verhoeven Marie Emmanuelle, against whom a red-corner notice was issued by the Chilean government, was arrested on February 17, in Uttar Pradesh while she was entering the country from Nepal.
Proceedings were initiated on the request of the Chilean government which alleged that Emmanuelle had participated in a conspiracy to commit a terror attack which led to the death of senator Jaime Guzman Errazuriz in Chile on April 1, 1991.

In her plea opposing the extradition proceedings, she contended that the treaty signed in 1897 was ratified in 1898 and was validated on April 28 by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) through an official notification which was ultra vires to the Constitution.
55-year-old Emmanuelle has also opposed the claims of the Chilean government, saying she was falsely implicated in the case due to political vendetta.
A vacation bench of justices S Muralidhar and I S Mehta issued notice to MEA and sought its reply by July 14 on the plea of Emmanuelle.

In her plea, filed through advocate Ramni Taneja, she said that pursuant to the red-corner notice, she was apprehended in Germany on January 25, 2014, and kept in pre-trial detention.

The German court had, however, rejected the extradition request of Chile after which on the basis of a valid Indian visa, she came here, but was arrested in Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the red-corner notice, her plea said.
She has also moved a separate plea seeking bail on which another bench of the high court has asked her to provide by tomorrow names and addresses of two persons who would stand surety for her as well as address of the place she would stay.
CBI told the court that it would verify the addresses of the sureties as well as the address where she would stay, after which the bench listed the matter for hearing on June 12.