‘Come back to India first’: Bombay HC to Vijay Mallya on his plea challenging provisions of Fugitive Economic Offender Act
The Bombay High Court asked Senior Advocate Amit Desai, who was representing Vijay Mallya, to take a "conscious decision”, and inform it during the next hearing on February 12.
The Bombay High Court Tuesday asked fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya when he intended to come back to India, while hearing his plea challenging the invocation of the Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) Act against him, along with his challenge to provisions of the Act.
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad noted that there were two petitions by Mallya pending before the High Court. While one pertained to his challenge to the constitutional validity of the FEO Act, the other, a criminal appeal, challenged the January 2019 order of the Special Court declaring Mallya as FEO.
The Bombay High Court noted that proceedings in the criminal appeal indicated that the matter was yet to be argued. “Having regard to these two matters pending adjudication before this court, we are of the opinion that both petitions cannot run together,” the court said.
The court asked Senior Advocate Amit Desai, who was representing Mallya, to take a “conscious decision,” and inform the court during the next hearing on February 12.
When Desai said that his client had written letters to discharge liabilities, CJ Chandrashekhar asked, “How does this wipe out criminal liability? Unless you submit to the court’s jurisdiction, how can we do anything? We are providing solutions. Come back to India first. Indicate when you’re coming, and then we will hear the petition on the next date.”
Desai said Mallya had made representations to the government to close all cases, as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has attached his assets worth over 14,000 crore, while earlier his liability was Rs. 6,000 crore. He said the assets were attached by ED and forwarded to banks.
ED alleged that Mallya committed bank fraud of over Rs. 6,200 crore with an outstanding liability of nearly Rs. 15,000 crore, including interest and, therefore, his plea challenging provisions of the FEO Act cannot be heard in his absence. The agency said he must submit to the judicial process in India.
Story continues below this ad
The central agency argued that section 14 of the FEO Act was to ensure that FEO does not abuse the process of law and does not stay away from the country by refusing to submit himself to the jurisdiction of the Courts in India by simply filing a petition through their lawyers.
“On the next date of hearing, the petitioner must make a statement or file an affidavit as to the date when he intends to come back to India. This order we have passed on an understanding in law that the petitions challenging the vires of the FEO Act, 2019, should not be heard in the absence of the petitioner having submitted himself within the jurisdiction of this court, representation of the petitioner through learned counsel having been considered,” said the court.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, along with Additional Solicitor Generals (ASGs) S V Raju and Anil Singh, submitted that in separate proceedings, the extradition of the petitioners is at a very advanced stage, and Mallya should not set up a plea before the court in Britain, citing the pendency of the matters before the Bombay HC and stalling extradition proceedings.
Solicitor General Mehta said that allowing Mallya’s petition to be argued in his absence “will have wider ramifications.”
Story continues below this ad
“There are many fugitives, and they are celebrating their birthdays. Nobody can legally object to celebrations, but they are mocking our nation,” Mehta said.
Mallya, through a writ petition, challenged Section 12(8) of the FEO Act, claiming that there was no provision for the restoration of confiscated properties in case of acquittal.
However, ED, in its response, stated that restoration was possible only if the accused returned to India and was acquitted of the predicate offence. The central agency also said that the special court had rightly declared Mallya as FEO.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
