Daijiworld Media Network - Mumbai
Mumbai, Feb 19: Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya on Wednesday informed the Bombay High Court that he is unable to provide a definite timeline for his return to India as his passport has been revoked and he is barred from leaving England and Wales under orders of courts in the United Kingdom.
The submission was made through his counsel Amit Desai before a bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad. The statement came in response to the court’s earlier direction seeking clarification on whether Mallya intended to return to India to face trial while pursuing his petitions challenging the order declaring him a fugitive economic offender and the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.
Mallya, who left India in March 2016, is accused of defaulting on multiple loan repayments amounting to several thousand crores. He was declared a Fugitive Economic Offender in January 2019 by a special court hearing cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Following the declaration, extradition proceedings were initiated against him.
In the statement filed before the High Court, Mallya said that pursuant to orders passed by courts in England, he is “not permitted to leave or attempt to leave England and Wales or apply for or be in possession of any international travel document.” He added that in view of these restrictions, he is unable to precisely state when he would be able to return to India.
Senior advocate Amit Desai further submitted that Mallya’s physical presence in India was not necessary for the High Court to hear his petitions challenging the fugitive offender tag and certain provisions of the Act.
Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, argued that Mallya had invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court, which is equitable in nature. He contended that a person who does not comply with the law cannot seek discretionary relief from the court.
“It is a settled position in law that a person not complying with law cannot be entrusted with the prerogative writ of this Court,” Mehta submitted.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the bench directed the Centre to file its reply to Mallya’s statement and posted the matter for further hearing next month.