Fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi has abandoned his damages claim in the UK High Court over his allegation that he was kidnapped from Antigua in 2021 and taken to Dominica as part of an alleged effort to return him to India.

The legal action ended after Choksi failed to provide court-ordered security for the defendants’ legal costs. The amount involved was £677,000, equivalent to roughly ₹8.6 crore. The court’s earlier judgment had required security for costs while jurisdiction and other preliminary issues remained unresolved.

What Did Mehul Choksi Claim?

Choksi alleged that the Indian government conspired with several individuals to unlawfully detain and transport him from Antigua to Dominica on May 23, 2021.

According to his case, he was lured to an apartment, assaulted and forcibly taken onto a boat before being transported to Dominica. He alleged that the operation was connected to efforts to secure his return to India, where he faces allegations linked to financial crimes.

The defendants have denied the allegations. The Government of India also challenged the UK court’s jurisdiction and relied on state-immunity arguments. The High Court judgment recorded that no final determination had been made on the truth of Choksi’s allegations.

Why Did Choksi Abandon the Case?

The claim did not reach a full trial on the allegations.

In February 2026, Justice Mansfield ordered Choksi to provide security for the defendants’ legal costs. The court ordered £425,000 in security for Gurdip Bath and Leslie Farrow-Guy, while a further £252,000 was ordered for Gurmit Singh and Gurjit Singh Bhandal.

Choksi failed to make the required payment. His claims against several defendants were subsequently struck out, and his lawyers later filed to discontinue the remaining proceedings against the Indian government and Barbara Jarabik.

As a result, the allegations themselves were not finally determined by the UK court.

Court Raised Questions About Evidence

The February judgment focused primarily on applications for security for costs rather than deciding whether Choksi’s kidnapping allegations were true.

The court examined issues including the strength of the case, the potential difficulty of recovering costs from a claimant living outside the jurisdiction and Choksi’s ability to provide the required security.

Reports on the proceedings also noted that some of the evidence relied upon by Choksi was given limited or no evidential weight. However, the court’s decision to require security for costs was not itself a final ruling that the alleged kidnapping did or did not occur.

Choksi Remains in Belgium as Extradition Case Continues

The UK litigation is separate from Choksi’s extradition proceedings in Belgium.

Choksi was arrested in Belgium in 2025 following India’s request for his extradition. An Antwerp court later issued an advisory opinion supporting extradition, but Belgian authorities said the final decision remained under examination as of August 2026.

Indian authorities want Choksi returned in connection with allegations arising from the Punjab National Bank fraud case, which also involves fugitive businessman Nirav Modi.

Sandeep Mistry Deported From UAE to India

The latest development involving Choksi comes alongside another major action in the wider Nirav Modi-linked investigation.

The Central Bureau of Investigation recently secured the deportation of Sandeep Mistry from the United Arab Emirates to India. Mistry was wanted in connection with the PNB fraud investigation and had been the subject of an Interpol Red Notice issued in July 2026.

CBI alleges that Mistry helped coordinate the operations of overseas entities connected to the case and was involved in fictitious international trade transactions. Investigators have also alleged that he helped prepare forged documents and pressured nominal directors of foreign companies. These remain allegations in the criminal case.

After arriving in Mumbai, Mistry was arrested by the CBI and produced before a special court. He was subsequently remanded to judicial custody until October 6.

What Happens Next for Choksi?

With the UK damages claim abandoned, Choksi’s immediate legal challenges remain focused elsewhere, particularly on the extradition proceedings in Belgium.

The UK case did not produce a judicial finding confirming his allegations of kidnapping or establishing liability against the Indian government or the other defendants. Instead, the proceedings ended after the required security for legal costs was not provided.

Meanwhile, Indian investigative agencies continue pursuing individuals linked to the wider PNB fraud investigation, including suspects and accused persons who have remained outside the country. The deportation of Sandeep Mistry from the UAE is the latest example of those international efforts.

The Delhi High Court has expressed serious concern over cases of fraudulent GST registrations obtained by misusing the PAN and Aadhaar details of unsuspecting citizens, giving the Centre and Delhi Police a final opportunity to devise an effective mechanism to prevent such fraud.The court observed that if the allegations made in the petitions are correct, fraudulent GST registrations are being obtained on a large scale in the names of innocent people, exposing them to substantial tax liabilities and causing revenue losses to the government.

Woman Alleges PAN-Aadhaar Misuse

A Bench of Justice Anil Khetarpal and Justice Shail Jain passed the order while hearing two petitions. One of the petitions was filed by a woman named Neha, who alleged that another person had used her PAN and Aadhaar details to obtain a fraudulent GST registration in her name.

The court noted that this was the second such case before it. The Bench observed that, if the allegations were found to be correct, they indicated that fraudulent GST registrations were being carried out extensively using the identities of innocent citizens. Such registrations can leave individuals facing tax liabilities arising from businesses with which they have no connection.

Court Suggests Facial Recognition And Video Verification

During the hearing, senior advocate Tarun Gulati placed several technological and administrative measures before the court to prevent misuse of PAN and Aadhaar details. One of the key suggestions was mandatory facial recognition of every GST registration applicant against the Aadhaar database.

The proposals also included video-based verification. Under the suggested system, an applicant would have to upload a 20-to-30-second video showing their face and the original PAN and Aadhaar cards. The applicant would also be required to read out a system-generated prompt containing their details and a unique code. The measure is intended to reduce the possibility of third parties using stolen or misused identity documents to obtain GST registrations.

IP Tracking And Physical Verification Proposed

Another proposal was to record and preserve the IP address and device location used while submitting a GST application. The information would remain available with the GST portal and the concerned jurisdictional authority so that it could be examined later if the identity of the person who submitted the application is disputed.

To identify shell or fraudulent businesses, the suggestions included mandatory physical verification of the proposed principal place of business before granting GST registration. Alternatively, a risk-based system could be used to conduct random physical inspections of GST-registered businesses twice a year.

Real-Time Alerts And Additional Safeguards

The proposals further called for real-time data sharing between the GST and Income Tax departments. Under such a system, a PAN holder could receive an immediate alert whenever their PAN is used to obtain GST registration. The system could also flag sudden and significant increases in turnover for further scrutiny.

Other proposed safeguards include alerts through DigiLocker, specific risk parameters for PAN-Aadhaar mismatches and additional checks when a PAN or Aadhaar number is being used for GST registration for the first time. Applicants could also be required to provide details of identifiable persons who can corroborate their identity and confirm the existence of the proposed business.

Centre And Police Given Final Chance

The Bench recorded that the respondents had not disputed that fraudulent GST registrations using the PAN and Aadhaar details of innocent citizens had become a serious problem since the implementation of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court observed that nearly nine years had passed, yet authorities had failed to effectively curb the malpractice.

The court also expressed concern that an officer deputed by Delhi Police to assist it was unaware of the issue despite its seriousness. The Bench has now given the CGST Commissioner, DGST Commissioner and Delhi Police Commissioner a final opportunity to find an effective solution.

The court warned that if the authorities failed to take effective measures, it would have no option but to pass appropriate and effective orders. The matter has been listed for further hearing on September 8.

What Happens Next?

The Delhi High Court’s intervention puts the spotlight on the need for stronger safeguards against identity misuse in GST registrations. With the Centre and Delhi Police given a final opportunity to address the issue, the next hearing on September 8 is expected to indicate what measures authorities propose to prevent fraudulent registrations and protect innocent PAN-Aadhaar holders from wrongful tax liabilities.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday conducted searches at 11 premises in Kolkata linked to Kohinoor Power as part of a money laundering investigation into an alleged ₹290 crore bank loan fraud. The searches were carried out under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and covered premises linked to the company’s promoters, Prashant Bothra and Vijay Bothra, as well as other directors and auditors.

The agency has alleged that loans obtained from banks to establish a 66 MW power plant in Jharkhand were diverted to other group entities and for personal use instead of being used for the intended project.

How Was the ₹290 Crore Loan Allegedly Diverted?

According to the ED, Kohinoor Power had secured bank financing for setting up the power project in Jharkhand. The funds were meant to be used for establishing the plant and meeting expenses related to the project.

However, the agency has alleged that a portion of the loan amount was transferred to other group companies, while some of the funds were allegedly used for personal purposes.

The ED is now examining the flow of the loan proceeds, including the bank accounts into which the funds were transferred, the companies involved in the transactions and the stated purpose of these financial movements.

Investigators are also trying to determine whether borrowed funds were moved to entities that had no direct connection with the proposed power project.

Why Was Only Around ₹7 Crore Recovered?

Kohinoor Power subsequently faced financial difficulties and entered insolvency proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal.

Liquidation proceedings were later initiated with the aim of recovering dues from the company’s available assets and resources.

However, according to officials, only around ₹7 crore could be recovered during liquidation, significantly lower than the outstanding bank exposure.

The ED is now examining how the company’s financial position deteriorated, what assets were available before insolvency proceedings began and how much of the borrowed money was allegedly diverted away from the power project.

What Is the ED Looking for in the Kolkata Searches?

Thursday’s searches form part of the agency’s investigation into the alleged diversion of loan proceeds and their subsequent laundering.

Officials are examining financial records, bank documents, business records and other material connected with the transactions. The evidence is expected to help investigators reconstruct the movement of funds and identify financial links between various group entities.

The ED has also searched premises linked to the company’s directors and auditors. Investigators are examining whether other individuals associated with Kohinoor Power played any role in the alleged financial irregularities.

Are Promoters, Directors and Auditors Also Under Scrutiny?

The searches covered premises linked to promoters Prashant Bothra and Vijay Bothra, along with other directors and auditors associated with the company.

Investigators are examining transactions through which the loan proceeds were allegedly transferred to other entities and whether those movements had any legitimate connection with the power project.

The role of individuals involved in the company’s financial management, accounting and movement of funds is also expected to be examined as part of the broader money laundering investigation.

What Happens Next in the ₹290 Crore Loan Probe?

The investigation is now focused on determining how much of the ₹290 crore borrowed from banks was actually used for the 66 MW power project, how much was transferred to other group entities and how much was allegedly used for personal purposes.

The agency is also examining why only around ₹7 crore could eventually be recovered during liquidation despite the much larger loan exposure.

The ED will analyse documents and other evidence gathered during the searches before deciding on further action. If investigators establish evidence of deliberate diversion of loan proceeds and attempts to disguise such transactions as legitimate financial dealings, further proceedings under the PMLA could follow against the individuals and entities concerned.

For now, the probe remains centred on the alleged misuse of the ₹290 crore bank loan, the movement of funds between different entities and the circumstances that resulted in only a fraction of the outstanding amount being recovered during liquidation.