UK High Court says "No Witness Evidence" of Choksi's Abduction 

The High Court of Justice in the United Kingdom has directed fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi to pay £677,000 into court as security for costs in a defamation lawsuit which he has filed. The court’s decision came earlier today during a hearing held under the King’s Bench Division.

Choksi reportedly filed the case against five people including Gurmit Singh, Gurjit Bhandal, Barbara Jarabik, Leslie Farrow-Guy and Gurdip Bath as well as the Government of India. The claim arises from events linked to his alleged disappearance from Antigua and Barbuda in 2021.

The order followed applications by the defendants who sought an order for Choksi requiring him to provide security to cover legal costs if the case is dismissed, particularly if it fails on jurisdictional grounds. The court is expected to decide in November 2026 whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case in the UK. Notably, Justice Mansfield, in his judgment, observed that there is little, if any, connection between the events and England, aside from Choksi’s assertion that the alleged conspiracy was formed there. The judgment stated that there was no direct evidence to support this claim and further concluded that there is no evidence establishing where the plan was conceived or advanced.

The issue of security for costs was argued during a hearing held on 18 December 2025 and legal representatives of both parties presented their arguments on whether Mehul Choksi should be required to provide security for costs. The £677,000 ordered by the court is intended to cover the estimated costs of a five-day jurisdiction hearing scheduled for November 2026. This amount will be much higher if the court will agree to take the case for trial.

It is worth mentioning that, regardless of the total amount of expenses, Mehul Choksi will not receive any remaining funds. The money submitted to the court will not be returned, as his assets are already being seized by the Indian government.

If the court later rules that it does have jurisdiction and allows the case to proceed, the defendants are expected to seek a further and higher security for costs order. Submissions before the court indicated that a full trial could last more than 20 hearing days with total legal costs estimated between £3 million and £4 million.

It is noteworthy that the claimant alleges in his statements that the governments of Antigua and Dominica either participated in, facilitated or acquiesced in the alleged kidnapping. However, no defamation claim has been filed against either government.

The court further stated that the claims against at least some of the defendants have reasonable prospects of success. Nevertheless, in his ruling, Justice Mansfield noted: “I am not satisfied that there is a strong probability of success.”

The judgment also pointed out that there is no independent witness evidence to substantiate the allegations of kidnapping and assault, apart from the claimant’s own account.

Notably, the Indian fugitive is claiming £200,000 however he has now been asked to pay £677,000 as security, with the cost expected to cost him significantly more. This clearly shows that he will be spending far beyond the £200,000 he claims which further raises questions about whether there is another agenda of him behind pursuing this case.

Reportedly, Choksi’s defamation claim is based on what his lawyers describe as ten main grounds.

Travel Allegations

One of the central arguments relates to travel by the five defendants to Antigua and Barbuda in April and May 2021. Choksi’s legal team has claimed that the individuals travelled in two groups on similar flights and questioned how this could have occurred if, as the defendants state, they had no prior connection with each other.

This claim was addressed by a private investigative team led by former Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur CBE QPM. It is worth mentioning that the team comprised of experienced ex-Scotland Yard officers who reportedly travelled to the Caribbean and also stayed there for a one in order to investigate the matter.

Independent Investigation: As part of that inquiry, investigators interviewed the travel agent who arranged the bookings. The agent stated that it is routine within the Caribbean travel industry for unrelated individuals to travel to the same destinations within short timeframes for holidays often using identical routes or flights. The agent explained that coinciding travel does not suggest any personal or professional connection and supported this position with documentary examples of similar booking patterns involving unrelated travellers, particularly at the time of COVID when the flights were very limited.

CCTV Footage

Another element relied upon by Choksi’s legal team was CCTV footage which reportedly showed Gurdip Bath entering a vehicle with another unidentified individual present nearby. The footage was presented as part of the broader narrative advanced by the claimant.

Investigation: A forensic video examination conducted by a United Kingdom–based specialist team concluded that the footage was of insufficient quality to permit reliable identification. Experts found that the resolution was too poor to confirm critical details which included the vehicle’s registration number, which was not readable. While Mr Bath has acknowledged that the individual with him was Leslie Farrow-Guy, the forensic assessment determined that the video itself does not allow any individual or subject to be identified with certainty.

Alleged Meeting with Prime Minister Browne

As a further ground, Choksi’s lawyer asserted that following the alleged abduction, Bath, Barbara Jarabik and Leslie Farrow Guy met with Prime Minister Gaston Browne of Antigua and Barbuda.

Independent Investigation: This claim was examined by an independent investigative team which verified with the Office of the Prime Minister that PM Browne was not in Antigua and Barbuda on the relevant date. Official records show that on 23 May 2021, Prime Minister Browne was in New York and later participated in the 74th World Health Assembly in Geneva via Zoom.

Vehicle Hire Documentation

Choksi’s legal team also relied on a vehicle hire agreement for a car used by Leslie Farrow-Guy which listed Gurmit Singh as an additional driver. They argued that Singh’s inclusion demonstrated prior acquaintance and coordination among the individuals.

Investigation: Investigators reviewed records obtained directly from the car hire company with forensic assistance. Their findings concluded that the hire agreement was digitally generated and that its contents were altered on 29 May 2021. Forensic analysis indicated that Gurmit Singh’s details were inserted through a deliberate post-issuance modification. Investigators noted that this raised questions as to why the document was amended more than a week after the vehicle had been hired. Apart from this, the driving number mentioned was also not correct.

Police Investigation Report

Another key piece of evidence cited by Choksi was a police investigation report prepared by Inspector Adonis Henry of the Antigua and Barbuda Royal Police Force. The credibility of this report was subsequently questioned following disclosures by Corporal Cedric Williams who is another officer involved in the investigation.

In a 15-page signed statement provided to Oliver Laurence, Corporal Williams admitted that he had developed an inappropriate degree of closeness with Priti Choksi during the investigation. He stated that this resulted in his removal from the case and raised concerns about the integrity of the investigative process. Senior officers, including the Police Commissioner and deputy commissioners, expressed concerns about impartiality following these admissions. In his statement, Corporal Williams acknowledged: “I was too close to Mrs. Choksi and her family in this matter and possibly telling her too much information,” an admission that has since been cited as undermining the reliability of the police report. Williams’ close association with Mehul Choksi’s wife raises concerns about potential bias, calling into question the credibility of the information presented. The same allegedly compromised investigation ultimately contributed to Interpol withdrawing the Red Notice issued against Mehul Choksi.

Dominica Settlement Agreement 

Choksi’s legal team further relied on a settlement agreement executed in Dominica concerning his alleged illegal entry into the country. Statements signed by Dominica’s Attorney General, Chief of Police, Director of Public Prosecutions and a serving police officer asserted that the claimant had been forcibly transported from Antigua to Dominica and was not present in Dominica of his own volition.

Information placed before the court has raised questions about the circumstances under which these statements were signed. It has been suggested that the officials involved were threatened with defamation proceedings related to their official actions which potentially influences their agreement to the settlement language. Investigators have pointed to contemporaneous records including the Roseau Police Station diary, which documents the circumstances of Choksi’s arrest and is cited as contradicting the account reflected in the settlement statement.

Vessel Calliope of Arne 

As part of its seventh argument, Choksi’s legal team asserted that the sailing vessel Calliope of Arne transported him from Antigua and Barbuda to Dominica on 23 May 2021. This claim was assessed against official immigration and telecommunications records.

The data from the Antigua and Barbuda Immigration Department show that the vessel departed Antigua at 10:09 a.m. on that day, while records indicate that Choksi left his residence at approximately 5:00 p.m. nearly seven hours later. The investigative team also relied on mobile phone data showing that on 23 May 2021, the mobile handset of Fernandes Fertinant, captain of the Calliope of Arne, connected to cellular towers in Guadeloupe at 5:47 p.m. and later to towers in Dominica at approximately 11:07 p.m. These timestamps indicate that the vessel was already en route to Dominica at a time when Choksi had not yet departed his residence.

Not only this, but Prime Minister Gaston Browne and Police Commissioner Atlee Rodney have both publicly stated that no evidence exists to support claims that Mehul Choksi was abducted. These statements were made during official briefings and media engagements, where both maintained that available investigative material does not substantiate allegations of forcible removal from Antigua.

Admission by Transporter

The investigative team also obtained a statement from a Jamaican national who admitted to being the individual responsible for transporting Choksi from Antigua to Dominica. Investigators noted that this admission aligns with official immigration entry and exit records maintained by the Antigua and Barbuda authorities, corroborating the travel timeline established through border control data.

Whatsapp Communications

WhatsApp message exchanges involving Barbara Jarabik were presented to the court. According to the assessment provided, the messages show Choksi making repeated personal advances toward Jarabik during the relevant period. Reviewers characterised the communications as an effort by Choksi to cultivate a personal relationship within the broader context of the dispute.

Despite allegations of an extra-marital relationship with Jarabik, Choksi continues to reside with his wife, Priti Choksi. Commentators have argued that the continuation of the marriage suggests a degree of awareness or involvement by his wife in the circumstances surrounding his disappearance with some stating that “no woman would stay with such a man” without such knowledge. The decision to continue supporting Mehul Choksi, despite public claims of an alleged affair, has prompted questions about Priti Choksi’s awareness of the narrative being advanced. If the allegations of an affair or so-called “honey-trapping” were accurate, one might reasonably have expected some public distancing. Instead, her continued association has led to speculation that she may have understood that this narrative was being presented as part of a broader effort to challenge or delay ongoing legal proceedings in India.

It is now a high time for the Indian investigative agencies on how Mehul Choksi will be submitting the costs of security to the honourable court of Justice as there has been no explanation of his source of funds. The recent court hearing also stated that there is no detailed evidence as to Choksi’s financial position or as to his ability to raise money for covering the security costs. There is still no explanation as to how he is covering his own legal costs, said the judgement.

Legal experts observing the proceedings have expressed scepticism regarding the likelihood of success of the defamation claim. Based on assessments shared by practitioners familiar with the case, Choksi’s chances of prevailing have been estimated at approximately seven percent with a strong view that the claim is likely to fail before the court.