India is unlikely to comply with Bangladesh’s request to extradite former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, despite increasing diplomatic pressure and mounting allegations surrounding her role in a deadly crackdown in 2024. The Indian government has maintained an unwillingness to extradite her even after receiving repeated formal requests from Dhaka.

According to a report by Times of India, the most recent extradition request, delivered through a diplomatic note on July 9 2025, is yet to be formally addressed by India. Hasina’s abrupt departure from Bangladesh in the wake of mass unrest that toppled her nearly 16-year premiership was a blow to India’s influence in the country.

Since then, the political situation in Dhaka has shifted dramatically, with a caretaker administration under Muhammad Yunus pursuing criminal charges against top members of the former ruling Awami League party that Hasina still officially heads. From an objective perspective New Delhi’s reluctance to engage with the extradition pleas appear rooted in a complex mixture of legal, political and strategic calculations.

While the interim government of Bangladesh has accused Hasina of crimes against humanity, including state-sanctioned killings during the extraordinarily disruptive and violent student-led protests - India is under no legal obligation to extradite her in the absence of a bilateral extradition treaty. The two countries have previously cooperated on high-profile returns of fugitives, but those cases were grounded in clear-cut criminal proceedings and reciprocal diplomatic consensus.

The current demand, by contrast, is entangled in questions of legitimacy and timing. India is also weighing the potential fallout of sending Hasina back to Dhaka, where she faces prosecution by a tribunal that her supporters and several international human rights groups have criticised for politicisation.

The tribunal has already sentenced Hasina to six months’ imprisonment in absentia in a contempt case and has indicted her on formal charges of crimes against humanity based partly on fresh evidence emerging from international media.

A leaked audio recording published by BBC Bangla, allegedly capturing Hasina instructing security forces to fire on protesters, has heightened the case’s profile. The BBC Eye Investigations unit, which compiled the report, linked the former prime minister to brutal reprisals carried out during the month-long protests in mid-2024.

According to a separate UN human rights investigation, the crackdown resulted in at least 1,400 deaths between July 15 and August 15 2024 during Hasina’s last few months in office. Dhaka has seized on the BBC’s reporting to bolster its claims, with Yunus’s administration arguing that the moral weight of the revelations demands an urgent international response.

Shafiqul Alam, press secretary to the chief adviser, described India’s position as “no longer tenable” and accused New Delhi of ignoring basic standards of justice. He said that neither regional friendships nor the strategic legacy of past cooperation could excuse what he called “the deliberate murder of civilians.” India’s leadership, however, is unlikely to be swayed by emotive appeals.

Delhi has long regarded Hasina as a reliable partner, especially on issues ranging from counterterrorism cooperation to cross-border infrastructure development. Her government’s willingness to align with Indian interests, particularly in countering Chinese influence in the Bay of Bengal, gave her an unusual degree of strategic latitude. Despite growing criticism of her increasingly authoritarian style, Hasina retained high-level contacts in the Indian security and diplomatic establishment up to the moment of her exit.

Granting her extradition now, under an interim regime whose future remains uncertain, would risk alienating Awami League loyalists and potentially complicating India’s future relations with whichever faction emerges dominant in Bangladeshi politics. Moreover, any Indian decision to extradite a former head of government would set a precedent that could echo beyond South Asia. Furthermore, extraditing Hasina would require India to be convinced that the charges against her are not politically motivated.

The international tribunal trying her is domestic in origin and has yet to gain international endorsement, unlike The Hague-based courts that handled the trials of former Yugoslav, Rwandan and more recently Philippine leaders. Without a broader international legal framework, India may find sufficient grounds to argue that extradition would be inappropriate at this stage.

India’s foreign ministry has so far limited itself to acknowledging receipt of Dhaka’s communications, without committing to any timeline or stance. The government’s silence, though criticised across the border in Bangladesh, appears to be part of a deliberate effort to avoid escalating tensions while awaiting further developments.

Even as Dhaka intensifies its campaign, support from major powers is likely to be tepid - especially as the world is focused on several other crises including the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the Iran-Israel conflict. Indian officials are likely watching closely to see whether global institutions or the UN push for action, which could provide New Delhi with political cover should it decide to revisit its position.