In 1969, a French court ruled that detention pending extradition did not constitute preconviction detention and thus could not be deducted from a sentence. The Indian courts, however, have reached a different conclusion in their interpretations of Section 428 of the new Indian Code. Initially, the courts ruled that the Section 428 detention credits applied to persons who had been convicted earlier, but whose sentences were still running when the new law was implemented in 1974. The question of applying Section 428 to detention spent in a foreign country during extradition proceedings was decided in Teja v. State of Andhra Pradesh. In 1967, while Teja was in the United States, he was charged with criminal breach of trust, cheating, and forgery. He escaped from the United States while on bail, fled to Costa Rica, and was finally arrested in London. He was extradited to India in 1971 and was tried, convicted, and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment, along with payment of a large fine. The question before the court was whether the 9 months Teja had spent in detention in London awaiting extradition could be credited to his sentence under Section 428. The court's affirmative decision was based on the premise that the British arrest had resulted from a warrant issued by a Delhi court in connection with the charge of which the accused was ultimately convicted. The court decided that when the ultimate purpose of the extradition proceedings abroad is the surrender of the person wanted by the national court for a trial for specific offenses, the period of detention spent by that person in the foreign country could be deemed properly equivalent to preconviction detention for the purpose of setoff against the term of imprisonment, as provided in Section 428 of the 1974 Indian Code. Casenotes are included.