Antwerp, March 5 -- The Indian government's efforts to extradite fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi, 65, remained hanging in the balance following a hearing in an Antwerp court on March 3. Central to this extradition case is whether Indian authorities were behind Choksi's alleged kidnapping and torture in the Caribbean in May 2021. Involvement in this could jeopardise the Indian administration's entitlement to extradite him. The public prosecutor appearing for the Belgian state, which is representing New Delhi's interests in the matter, referred to a separate case that Choksi has filed in the High Court in London against the Indian government and five individuals for kidnapping and torturing him. By way of argument, the Belgian prosecutor referred to the British judge Gavin Mansfield's February 6 ruling which had not been conclusively in Choksi's favour, The prosecutor highlighted - though proceedings have yet to advance to trial - that Mansfield in his ruling had said, "This is not one of those rare cases where it can be seen that there is a high probability of success, either on the preliminary issues (meaning diplomatic immunity and jurisdiction) or at trial.'' No one from the Indian embassy in Belgium or from CBI was present at the hearing in Antwerp. A secret judgment, not binding on the Belgian government, will be delivered on or after 20 March. Choksi, once the billionaire owner of Gitanjali Group - steeped in the jeweller business from manufacturing to retail, with over 4,000 outlets in India alone - is wanted by the Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for allegedly defrauding Punjab National Bank to the tune of between Rs6,000 to Rs13,000 crores. Choksi denies the charge. In August 2024, CBI produced copies of two orders issued by Mumbai courts to Belgian authorities. Choksi was thereafter arrested in April 2025, and has been in an Antwerp prison since. He appealed against being apprehended and detained, but lost at both regional and national levels of the Belgian judiciary. Eighteen months after the Indian government's formal request for Choksi's extradition, a three-member bench of judges presided over what is known as 'the indictment chamber'. There are at least two more stages of determination before the Belgian government is called upon to decide on the issue. Subsequently, the European Court of Human Rights could come in to the picture. On Tuesday, Choksi appeared in the courthouse-looking thinner--accompanied by two armed police officers, who stood near him for the duration of the hearing. His battery of lawyers--Simon Bekaert, John Maes and Christophe Marchand-are among the lawyers who successfully prevented Julian Assange's extradition to the United States to face justice there. Arguing against Choksi's extradition to India, they submitted, 'It is contrary to international law to grant an extradition request from a country that has proceeded to abduct, torture and attempted to illegally extradite the very person whose extradition it is now requesting.' Describing Choksi as a 'concluant', meaning petitioner or provider of evidence, the lawyers added there is 'very real risk that India would resort to extrajudicial measures to obtain a confession from the concluant upon his return to India or otherwise mistreat him once he is under the control of the Indian government'. John Maes was particularly passionate in detailing Choksi's alleged abduction and torture, comparing it to the villainy portrayed in Bollywood films. He added that Choksi had also contested the Red Corner Notice against him on the grounds of being kidnapped and tortured on behalf of Indian authorities. After examining the evidence furnished by him, a five-member panel of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files, the CCF, in an October 2022 report concluded that it discerned "a credible possibility that the applicant's abduction from Antigua to Dominica had the ultimate purpose of deporting the applicant to India, and resolves this creates a strong doubt as to the possibility for the applicant to receive a fair treatment or trial if returned to India". Last year, Choksi challenged his arrest in Belgium on the basis of CCF's ruling. However, the courts in Antwerp and Brussels ordered the continuation of his incarceration pending hearing of the extradition matter.The constitutionality of India seeking Choksi's extradition is founded on a quant treaty between Britain and Belgium in the early 20th century which came into force in then British ruled India. The agreement was adopted by the Indian ministry of external affairs after the country's independence. It covers 'fraud' as an extraditable offence....