The interim government in Bangladesh has sent a formal letter to India seeking the extradition of deposed Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the move likely to further complicate the already frosty Dhaka-New Delhi relationship.

Touhid Hossain, foreign affairs adviser to Muhammad Yunus, told the Bangladeshi media that a note verbale (formal diplomatic letter) had been sent to India on Monday.

“We have clearly informed India of our position. We have conveyed that we want her (Hasina) back for (the) judicial process,” he was quoted in the Bangladeshi media.

External affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal confirmed the receipt of a note verbale “in connection with an extradition request” but refused to comment further “at this time”.

Multiple Indian and Bangladeshi sources said the extradition treaty did not oblige New Delhi to hand Hasina over, nor could the Narendra Modi government do so without hurting India’s geopolitical interests and diminishing its stature globally.

Hasina, a five-time Prime Minister, arrived in India on August 5 after weeks of violent protests against her government and has been staying at an undisclosed location, possibly near Delhi. The Modi government has said Hasina “made a request” to come to India “at very short notice”.

The Yunus regime has from the outset been demanding that India send Hasina back so she can be tried for crimes allegedly committed during the protests that deposed her and for alleged misdeeds during her latest, decade-and-a-half stint in power.

Monday’s note verbale -- coming a fortnight after foreign secretary Vikram Misri visited Bangladesh and the two countries agreed to pursue a constructive relationship — is, however, the first formal request for Hasina’s extradition.

“It’s a tricky issue and will require deft diplomacy,” a source in the Indian foreign policy establishment said, adding that the matter fell within the ambit of the 2013 extradition treaty between the two countries.

The source said India was under no obligation to hand Hasina over as the treaty made it clear that “extradition may be refused” if the alleged offence for which it is sought is a political one.

The treaty, however, includes a provision saying offences like murder wouldnot be regarded as political offences.

“So, there will be a different interpretation in Bangladesh, particularly with an International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) having issued arrest warrants against Hasina, who faces numerous charges, including crimes against humanity, genocide and murder,” the foreign policy expert said.

Multiple sources in both countries confirmed that India was anyway not obliged to respond to an extradition request based on a domestic ICT’s findings against Hasina.

“The Yunus government only wants to deflect attention from pressing issues like law and order, inflation, power failure, labour unrest, falling garment exports and a slump in forex reserves.... Their inability to handle the problems is the main trigger behind the extradition request,” a source in Dhaka said.

An Indian source concurred, referring to Dhaka’s total silence on Hasina’sextradition when Misri was in Bangladesh barely two weeks ago.

“They were complaining about Hasina’s speeches then, and now they want her back.... What changed in between?” the source said.

“It’s a clear indication that they do not want any improvement in relations.... They only want to add more complexity by cosying up to Pakistan, releasing people convicted of terror charges, desisting from delivering on India’s concerns on the safety of the minorities, and demanding Hasina’s extradition.”

A strategic affairs expert said that extraditing Hasina — a move favoured by a lobby within the BJP — cannot be a “wise decision” as India will “lose the limited leverage” it has with “Yunus and company” the moment she is sent back.

“Besides, it will affect India’s image as an emerging superpower. There may be some charges against her but we cannot forget that we built fantastic relations when she was at the helm,” the expert said.

The third and most important point, he said, was the absence of “fairness and transparency” in the present judicial system in Bangladesh.

“There can be mob justice. There is every possibility of a biased trial. India cannot be irresponsible and jeopardise her safety,” the expert said.

Legal notice

The owner of one of the biggest corporate entities in Bangladesh has initiated a legal effort as a Singaporean citizen to recover his financial losses after the Yunus government froze his and his family’s assets, causing them to lose control over their companies, Britain’s Financial Times newspaper has reported.

Saiful Alam, owner of the S Alam Group, has in a “notice of dispute” sent to Yunus and his key advisers given the regime six months to resolve the matter. Else, Alam has warned, he would pursue international arbitration under a 2004 bilateral investment treaty between Bangladesh and Singapore.

Alam and his family had renounced their Bangladeshi passports in 2020 and are now Singaporean citizens.

The S Alam Group — which has interests in sectors like food, construction, garments, and banking – has come under scrutiny from multiple government agencies since Yunus took charge. Several other prominent business houses, such as Beximco, are also under the scanner of government agencies.

“Most of these actions are politically motivated… (and) have brought down business confidence in Bangladesh. Both domestic and international investments have dried up in recent months, pushing the economy to the brink,” a Bangladeshi economist said.