UK court clears Ajith Mupparapu extradition over alleged plot to kill ex-wife’s family

A London court has cleared the extradition of UK-based pharmacist Ajith Kumar Mupparapu to India, where he is wanted to face trial over allegations that he was involved in multiple attempts to target his former wife's family in Hyderabad in 2023.

Mupparapu, 46, an Indian-origin British citizen, appeared before Westminster Magistrates Court in London. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) presented the case on behalf of Indian authorities, while Mupparapu's legal team opposed his extradition.

What the UK court ruled

District Judge John Zani ruled that Mupparapu has a case to answer and can be extradited to India. The decision was based in part on assurances provided by Indian authorities concerning his treatment while in judicial custody.

The extradition hearing took place in April, with the judgment subsequently handed down in writing this week.

The ruling does not establish Mupparapu's guilt. It allows the Indian authorities to pursue his extradition so that he can face the criminal proceedings for which he is wanted.

ALSO READ | Thrissur accident: Kin of TN students unaware of fatal trip; heartbreaking last visuals emerge

What is the case against Ajith Mupparapu?

The case presented before the London court concerns four separate incidents alleged to have taken place in 2023. According to the prosecution's case, all four incidents were connected to members of Mupparapu's former wife's family after she filed for divorce.

The allegations include murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to murder.

The four alleged incidents presented to the court were:

1. Alleged arsenic poisoning plot

The first allegation concerns an alleged conspiracy to murder Mupparapu's wife and members of her family by using arsenic poisoning.

The alleged poisoning is significant to the case because Sirisha Muttavarapu's mother died in July 2023. Telangana authorities are seeking Mupparapu as part of their investigation into her death.

The circumstances surrounding the death and the alleged poisoning form part of the wider case against him.

2. Alleged plan involving succinylcholine injections

The second allegation concerns an alleged conspiracy to kill Mupparapu's father-in-law using succinylcholine injections.

The UK court was told that co-conspirators were allegedly involved in this plan.

3. Alleged attempt to hire contract killers

The third allegation is that Mupparapu attempted to hire contract killers in India to murder his father-in-law.

According to the case presented to Westminster Magistrates Court, this was another alleged attempt to arrange the killing of a member of his former wife's family.

4. Alleged staged road accident

The fourth allegation concerns an alleged plan to have Mupparapu's father-in-law killed in a road accident designed to appear accidental.

The prosecution alleged that co-conspirators were hired as part of the plan.

Taken together, the four allegations form the basis of the Indian authorities' request for Mupparapu's extradition.

Sirisha Muttavarapu's family and the 2023 death

The allegations centre on the family of Sirisha Muttavarapu, who had filed for divorce from Mupparapu.

Her mother died in July 2023 after the alleged arsenic poisoning. Telangana authorities subsequently sought Mupparapu in connection with their investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death and the other alleged incidents.

The case therefore involves both the alleged poisoning and separate allegations concerning attempts to target Sirisha Muttavarapu's father.

What Mupparapu's lawyers argued

Mupparapu's lawyers opposed his extradition to India.

The defence argued that there was insufficient evidence to justify sending him to India to face the allegations. His legal team also raised concerns about the possibility that he could face torture if extradited.

The UK court considered those concerns alongside assurances provided by Indian authorities regarding Mupparapu's treatment in judicial custody.

Judge John Zani ultimately concluded that Mupparapu had a case to answer and that the assurances were sufficient for extradition to be permitted.

ALSO READ | 22-km police chase ends with jilted lover drinking poison after boy's abduction

Why the extradition ruling matters

The ruling represents a significant development in the investigation because Mupparapu is currently based in Britain and the allegations against him concern events in Hyderabad.

UK extradition proceedings do not determine whether the requested person is guilty of the offences alleged in the requesting country. Instead, the court considers whether the legal requirements for extradition are satisfied and whether relevant safeguards, including assurances about the person's treatment, have been addressed.

In this case, the court accepted the assurances concerning Mupparapu's treatment in Indian custody and ruled that he could be extradited.

What happens next?

The ruling clears the way for the Indian authorities to seek Mupparapu's transfer to India, where he is wanted to face trial over the allegations arising from the four incidents in 2023.

The extradition decision itself is not a finding of guilt. The allegations of murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to murder remain allegations and would have to be established through the Indian judicial process.

The case now moves closer to an Indian trial, where evidence relating to the alleged arsenic poisoning, the death of Sirisha Muttavarapu's mother and the three other alleged plots can be examined in detail.

The case combines a cross-border extradition dispute with a serious criminal investigation involving multiple alleged attempts to target members of one family.

The four allegations presented before the UK court are distinct but connected: an alleged arsenic poisoning plot, an alleged plan involving succinylcholine injections, an alleged attempt to hire contract killers and an alleged staged road accident.

The UK court's decision is significant because it resolves the extradition stage in favour of the Indian authorities, while leaving the question of criminal responsibility to the Indian courts.

Mupparapu's defence has disputed the sufficiency of the evidence and raised concerns about his treatment in India. The court's acceptance of assurances from Indian authorities addressed the latter concern for the purpose of the extradition decision.

The next major development will be whether and when Mupparapu is transferred to India and how the allegations are dealt with during the subsequent criminal proceedings.