“Reasonable Decision To Allow….”: Nirav Modi’s Upscale London Apartment Sale Approved By UK Court

In a significant development in the ongoing legal saga surrounding fugitive diamond merchant Nirav Modi, a London high court has ruled that his luxury apartment, valued at a minimum of GBP 5.25 million, can be sold. This decision, handed down by Master James Brightwell following a remote hearing attended by Nirav Modi, who is currently incarcerated in Thameside prison in southeast London, marks a pivotal moment in the legal proceedings concerning the disputed property.

The case revolves around the ownership of the apartment, located at 103 Marathon House in the affluent Marylebone area of central London. Trident Trust Company (Singapore) Pte Limited, the claimant in the case, seeks to sell the apartment asset, while the Enforcement Directorate (ED) contends that the property’s assets stem from a massive fraud perpetrated on the Punjab National Bank (PNB), for which Nirav Modi is facing extradition proceedings.

Master Brightwell’s ruling allows for the sale of the property, with the stipulation that it must fetch a value not less than GBP 5.25 million. “I am satisfied that it is a reasonable decision to allow for the property to be sold for GBP 5.25 million or above,” Master Brightwell concluded.

This decision comes after careful consideration of representations made by the ED, which advocated for the proceeds from the sale to be held in a secure account after clearing all pressing liabilities associated with the trust holding the property.

The legal proceedings surrounding the sale of the apartment highlight the complex nature of the case. The trust holding the property was created in December 2017, in the name of Nirav Modi’s sister, Purvi Modi, and their family as beneficiaries. Nirav Modi, asserting his claim as the “true settler” of the trust, maintains that he should be treated as a beneficiary, alleging that he contributed to the purchase of the property through a loan or gift of GBP 625,000 to the trust.

During the court proceedings, Nirav Modi, clad in casual attire, followed the proceedings remotely from his prison cell and raised concerns about potential buyers linked to ongoing investigations by the ED. Notably, one of the main prospective buyers of the property is an Indian-origin entrepreneur who is under investigation, prompting Nirav Modi to express apprehensions about the potential freezing of sale proceeds by the ED in the future.

In addition to the legal battle over the sale of the apartment, Nirav Modi faces a multitude of legal challenges both in India and the United Kingdom. In 2022, he lost his legal battle in the Supreme Court against extradition to India in connection with the estimated USD 2 billion PNB loan scam case. However, his case is reportedly “statute barred,” indicating further pending litigation.

Meanwhile, Nirav Modi has been actively participating in related legal proceedings from prison, including addressing pending legal costs amounting to GBP 150,247.00 accrued over failed extradition appeal proceedings. Earlier this month, a High Court summary judgment ordered a Dubai-based company connected with Nirav Modi, Firestar Diamond FZE, to repay a loan exceeding USD 8 million owed to the Bank of India.

Nirav Modi’s arrest on March 19, 2019, on an extradition warrant based on charges by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and ED marked the beginning of his legal woes. The charges against him in India encompass various criminal proceedings, including the CBI case involving fraud on the PNB resulting in losses equivalent to over GBP 700 million, the ED case related to alleged money laundering, and a separate set of criminal proceedings involving alleged interference with evidence and witnesses in the CBI proceedings.

Despite the legal setbacks, the ruling allowing for the sale of Nirav Modi’s luxury London apartment represents a significant development in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the embattled diamond merchant. As the legal proceedings continue to unfold, the outcome of the sale and its implications remain subject to further scrutiny and debate within legal circles and beyond.