Vijay Mallya can be regarded as 'fugitive from justice', says UK High Court

Agencies
May 10, 2018

New Delhi/London, May 10: Liquor baron Vijay Mallya, wanted in India to face charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to around Rs 9,000 crore, can be regarded as a "fugitive from justice", the UK High Court has concluded.

Judge Andrew Henshaw, who upheld a worldwide freeze order and ruled in favour of 13 Indian state-owned banks to recover funds amounting to nearly 1.145 billion pounds in a judgment Tuesday, took note of the fact that the 62-year-old businessman is contesting his extradition to India relating to "alleged financial misconduct".

"In all these circumstances, and even taking account of the fact that Dr. Mallya is contesting the alleged grounds for extradition, there are grounds for regarding Dr. Mallya as a fugitive from justice," the judge said as part of his ruling.

The High Court remained unconvinced by Mallya's claim that he has been a non-resident Indian (NRI) since 1988 and has lived in England since 1992, a country where he has indefinite leave to remain (ILR).

"The evidence indicates that prior to March 2016 Dr. Mallya travelled fairly regularly between India and England for business and political reasons. Most of his business interests were in or closely connected with India, most notably United Breweries Group and Kingfisher Airlines Whilst Dr. Mallya has indefinite leave to stay in the UK, he is said to be a non-resident taxpayer," the court observed.

The judge also concluded that the businessman had been in "clear breach" of a Karnataka court's order when he disposed of assets like a historic sword of Tipu Sultan acquired at an auction in 2003.

"The sword of Tipu Sultan is an item of historic importance which Dr. Mallya bought at an auction in 2003 for the equivalent of GBP 188,400 and states that he gave away in 2016 as his family members considered that it was bringing him bad luck," Judge Henshaw notes in his judgment.

"Dr. Mallya declined to state in correspondence to whom the sword was given. Dr. Mallya was unable to put forward any basis for contending that the disposal was not in breach of the Karnataka High Court's interim injunction, and accepted that it occurred after the Supreme Court had made clear that the injunction covered subsequently acquired assets It does, though, appear to me to have been in clear breach of the Karnataka court's order," he adds.

The judge, however, was less certain that luxury cars and yachts had been undeclared or disposed of by Mallya as claimed by the legal team representing the 13 Indian banks State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Corporation bank, Federal Bank Ltd, IDBI Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Jammu & Kashmir Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, Punjab National Bank, State Bank of Mysore, UCO Bank, United Bank of India and JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt Ltd.

The judge noted: "The Claimants [Indian banks] say there are numerous other assets which have been linked to Dr. Mallya in various sources on the internet, but which he denies that he owns. These comprise three yachts, numerous cars and the Mabula Game Reserve in South Africa.

"The registered/asserted owners are offshore companies and/or trusts. Since these matters are unverified, I do not consider I can take account of them."

Mallya's purchase of a Ferrari 246 GTS with an estimated value of 480,000 pounds was also questioned by the Indian banks. The UK court concluded that it may be the case that the payment of the deposit on the Ferrari was in breach of the Karnataka High Court's interim injunction.

"However, this point was not the subject of any detailed argument before me and, overall, I do not consider that the matters relating to the Ferrari carry matters any further on this application," the judge concluded.

The ruling by the UK court has been described as "significant" by TLT LLP, the UK law firm which represented the Indian banks in the case.

"This is a positive and big step forward. The judgement enables our client banks to proceed with enforcement of the Indian Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) ruling, which has now been registered and is immediately enforceable," said Paul Gair, partner in TLT's Banking & Financial Services litigation team.

"We are considering all of our options with our clients the worldwide freezing order has worldwide effect, so it's all of his assets wherever they may be. There are provisions for his weekly allowance, within which he can meet his needs," he added.

Vijay Mallya, who remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April last year, will return for the last leg of his ongoing extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London on July 11, after which the court is expected to set a timeline for judgment in that case.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), representing the Indian government, has claimed it has successfully established a prima facie case of fraud against the businessman.

Mallya has claimed the criminal charges against him are "without substance" and "politically motivated".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 21,2020

Pune/Mumbai, Feb 21: A BJP youth wing leader from Pune on Thursday submitted a complaint application to the police against AIMIM leader Waris Pathan for his controversial remarks made recently in Karnataka.

Pathan has claimed he has been quoted out of context.

Parismal Deshpande, a BJYM worker, submitted the written application at the Deccan Gymkhana police station, demading action against Pathan for allegedly promoting enmity between different groups and outraging religious feelings of a community.

Deshpande, in his complaint stated, that Pathan reportedly said "15 crore hai lekin 100 crore pe bhari hai' (We are 15 crore but we can dominate 100 crore).

"The statement by Pathan promotes violence and create a divide between two communities.

"Because of such statements, there are possibilities of atmosphere getting vitiated. Hence, he should be booked under IPC sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups, 295A (outraging religious feelings), and 504 (provoking breach of the peace)," Deshpande said in the complaint.

An officer from the Deccan police station confirmed receiving the application.

Meanwhile, in Mumbai, the BJP slammed Pathan.

The saffron party on Thursday tweeted @BJP4Maharashtra saying, "Waris Pathan, who are you threatening to? Shiv Sena led government may tolerate your comments; but BJP and people of Maharashtra will teach you a lesson that your hate- mongering speeches will be shut."

However, Pathan has issued a statement to the media, saying he has been quoted out of context.

"I hereby wish to state that the media reports on TV channels showing my statement made in the public meeting at Gulbarga five days back have totally quoted me out of context," Pathan claimed on late Thursday evening.

"I wish to reiterate that I can never say anything intentionally or unintentionally that hurts the sentiments of any caste, community or gender. I am a proud Indian and respects the plurality of this country," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 5,2020

New Delhi, Jan 5: Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Sunday sàid it was "shameful" that Sadaf Jafar, SR Darapuri and Pavan Rao were arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Police for violence without any evidence against them.

He also said that it was a shocking admission by the police that there is no evidence of their involvement.

"Sadaf Jafar, S R Darapuri and Pavan Rao Ambedkar released on bail after police ADMITTED no evidence of their involvement in violence. Shocking admission," he said on Twitter.

"If that were so, why did the police arrest them in the first place? And how did the Magistrate remand them to custody without looking at the evidence," he asked.
"The law says 'find evidence, then arrest'. The reality is 'first arrest, then search for evidence'. Shameful," Chidambaram tweeted.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 17,2020

New Delhi, Jan 17: Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia does not have any car on his name, according to information shared in the poll affidavit filed by him for Delhi elections.

In the affidavit, it is also shown that while his self-acquired immovable property remained roughly the same as in 2015. His wife's self-acquired immovable property is worth roughly about Rs 65 lakh, as per his latest affidavit.

In the papers submitted during the nomination for 2015 Delhi polls, the senior AAP leader had declared that he owned a Maruti Swift car of make 2013.

However, in his 2020 affidavit, he has mentioned "nil" in the column for motor vehicles and other means of transport.

In the affidavit submitted on Thursday, his moveable assets were declared worth Rs 4,74,888 for 2018-19, as against Rs 4,92,624 for 2013-14.

In 2015, Sisodia had informed in his affidavit that he had bought a property in Vasundhara, Ghaziabad, worth Rs 5.07 lakh in April 2001. The approximate current market value of self-acquired property in 2015 was Rs 12 lakh.

In his current affidavit, the AAP leader has mentioned the same property. However, the approximate current market value of self-acquired property in 2020 has increased to Rs 21 lakh.

In his affidavit for the 2015 polls, Sisodia had also said that his wife had purchased a property in March 2008 costing Rs 8.70 lakh. At that time, the approximate value of her self-acquired property was Rs 20 lakh.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.