in paragraph 18 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the Supreme Court of Justice, Portugal granted extradition of appellant Abu Salem for the following offences, included in the request of public prosecution, as is clear from Para 13.1 of the order dated 27.1.2005 of the Supreme Court of Justice, Portugal, which was also confirmed by the Constitutional Court of Portugal. In paragraph 50 it has come that the Government of Portugal rejected the request for extradition of the appellant for the offences under Sections 201, 212, 324, 326, 427 of the Penal Code, Sections 3 (4), 5 and 6 of the TADA Act, Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, Section 9-B of the Explosives Act and Section 25 (1-A) and (1-B) of the Arms Act. Therefore, he submits that petitioner who is charged under the provisions of Section 302 read with Section 120B can be tried at Bhopal as request for extradition was accepted in other similar offence charged with Section 302 IPC. Similarly placing reliance on paragraph 61of the said judgment, the Supreme Court rejected the contention of the appellant that he can be tried only for the offences which are related to the said International Convention under which he was extradited. In paragraph 74 the Supreme Court held that the appellant has been charged within the permissible scope of Section 21 (b) of the Extradition Act and the Designated Court has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned orders. The impugned order was framing of charge on 18.3.2006 against the appellant whereby appellant was charged for 8 offences. Thus, placing reliance on these paragraphs of the
