1. Context: Rising Identification of Indian Fugitives Abroad
India’s efforts to trace economic offenders and criminal fugitives abroad have intensified in recent years, reflecting a stronger institutional focus on transnational crime control. Government data for 2024–25 shows a significant rise in the number of fugitives located overseas, marking the highest figure in over a decade.
The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) annual report notes that 71 fugitives wanted by India were located in foreign countries in 2024–25, compared to a range of 15–42 annually over the previous decade. This trend highlights improved intelligence gathering, inter-agency coordination, and international cooperation mechanisms.
Locating fugitives abroad is a critical first step in the extradition or deportation process. Failure at this stage weakens the credibility of the criminal justice system, allows proceeds of crime to remain beyond reach, and undermines deterrence against high-value economic and transnational crimes.
Effective identification of fugitives abroad reflects state capacity in global policing; if ignored, criminal networks exploit jurisdictional gaps, eroding rule of law and public trust.
Key statistics:
- 71 fugitives located abroad (2024–25) — highest in 12 years
- Previous range: 15 (2013) to 42 (2015)
2. Extradition Outcomes and Return of Fugitives
While locating fugitives has improved, their actual return to India remains more limited, underlining the complexity of extradition processes. In 2024–25, 27 fugitives returned to India, including through extradition, deportation, voluntary return, or arrest based on Look Out Circulars (LoCs).
Over the last decade, annual extraditions or deportations have ranged between 5 and 29, with the highest number recorded in 2023. This gap between identification and return underscores procedural delays, legal challenges in foreign jurisdictions, and differences in domestic legal standards.
The government has reiterated its political commitment to bringing fugitives back. At a CBI conference in 2025, the Union Home Minister emphasised the need for a more stringent and outcome-oriented approach to extradition.
Extradition effectiveness determines whether detection translates into justice; if returns remain low, deterrence weakens despite improved tracing capabilities.
Key statistics:
- 27 fugitives returned (2024–25)
- Annual returns historically: 5–29
- 134 fugitives facilitated back to India in past 5 years (CBI officials)
“Committed to bringing back fugitives who fled India.” — Government statement (as reported)
3. Institutional Role of the CBI and Interpol Mechanisms
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) functions as India’s nodal agency for international police cooperation through Interpol. Its Global Operations Centre plays a central role in geo-locating fugitives, issuing Interpol notices, and coordinating with foreign law enforcement agencies.
During 2024–25, the CBI also processed over 22,200 applications for renunciation of Indian citizenship on the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) portal. This function is significant, as citizenship changes can affect jurisdiction, extradition feasibility, and enforcement of Indian law.
The use of Look Out Circulars (LoCs), Interpol Red Notices, and close coordination with the Ministries of Home Affairs and External Affairs reflects a whole-of-government approach. Weak coordination at this stage could lead to loss of actionable intelligence and procedural lapses.
Strong institutional coordination ensures continuity from investigation to international enforcement; neglect would fragment responsibility and slow cross-border criminal justice.
Institutional functions:
- Interpol coordination via CBI (NCB-India)
- Use of LoCs and Interpol notices
- Citizenship-related scrutiny linked to fugitives
4. Extradition Treaties and International Legal Frameworks
India’s extradition capacity is shaped by its international legal commitments. As of 2025, India has extradition treaties with 48 countries and extradition arrangements with 12 countries, providing a bilateral legal basis for surrender of fugitives.
In addition, India is a party to multilateral conventions such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), which can serve as a supplementary legal framework when bilateral treaties are absent. These instruments enhance India’s ability to seek cooperation in corruption and economic offence cases.
However, treaty presence does not guarantee swift extradition. Foreign courts often scrutinise human rights conditions, due process standards, and the nature of offences, which can delay or dilute outcomes.
Legal frameworks create possibilities, not guarantees; without diplomatic and legal follow-through, treaties remain under-utilised.
Treaty landscape:
- 48 extradition treaties
- 12 extradition arrangements
- Multilateral support: UNCAC
5. Extradition Requests: Volume vs Outcomes
Parliamentary data from the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) indicates that over the last five years, India sent 137 extradition requests to foreign governments. Of these, 134 were accepted, but 125 remain pending, and only 25 fugitives were successfully extradited.
This mismatch between acceptance and completion reflects prolonged judicial proceedings abroad, appeals by fugitives, and administrative delays. Rejections remain low (3 cases), suggesting that substantive grounds are generally accepted, but procedural completion is slow.
Pending extradition cases impose costs on governance by delaying justice, prolonging asset recovery, and signalling enforcement fatigue to offenders.
The bottleneck lies not in acceptance but execution; unresolved cases weaken the credibility of international legal cooperation.
Key statistics:
- 137 extradition requests sent
- 134 accepted, 125 pending
- 25 successful extraditions
- 3 rejections
6. Letters Rogatory and Judicial Cooperation Challenges
Letters Rogatory (LRs) are formal judicial requests seeking evidence or action from foreign courts. In 2024–25, 74 LRs were sent, of which 47 were fully executed, indicating moderate success but persistent backlog.
As of March 31, 2025, a total of 533 LRs were pending with foreign countries. These include 276 related to CBI cases and 257 from State police and other Central agencies, highlighting the scale of unresolved judicial cooperation.
Delays in execution of LRs slow investigations, weaken prosecutions, and may result in loss of evidence. This directly impacts conviction rates and undermines confidence in cross-border criminal justice.
Judicial cooperation is the backbone of extradition and investigation; excessive pendency dilutes enforcement capacity and prolongs impunity.
Key statistics:
- 74 LRs sent (2024–25)
- 47 fully executed
- 533 LRs pending (as of March 31, 2025)
7. Governance Implications and Way Forward
The data reflects a mixed picture: improved tracing of fugitives, but persistent challenges in securing their return. This has implications for rule of law, economic governance, and India’s international credibility in tackling financial and transnational crimes.
Strengthening outcomes requires faster judicial cooperation, specialised extradition cells, sustained diplomatic engagement, and capacity-building in international law within investigative agencies. A focus on execution rather than mere acceptance of requests is critical.
Governance effectiveness is judged by outcomes, not intent; without systemic reforms, rising identification will not translate into justice delivery.
Policy directions:
- Faster execution of extradition requests
- Reducing LR pendency through dedicated coordination
- Enhanced legal-diplomatic capacity in agencies
Conclusion
India’s recent success in locating a record number of fugitives abroad signals improved global policing capacity. However, persistent delays in extradition and judicial cooperation highlight structural challenges. Addressing these gaps is essential for strengthening rule of law, deterring economic offences, and ensuring long-term credibility of India’s criminal justice system in an interconnected world.
