‘Submit to the Law First’: Bombay HC Refuses to Hear Vijay Mallya’s Plea via Video Link
MUMBAI – In a significant legal development on Tuesday, the Bombay High Court sent a stern message to embattled businessman Vijay Mallya, refusing to entertain his petition via video conferencing. The court directed the former liquor baron to file an affidavit specifying a definitive timeline for his return to India, asserting that judicial relief cannot be sought while remaining a fugitive.
The Judicial Ultimatum: Presence Over Privilege
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad was reviewing Mallya’s challenge to the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) Act. The court’s stance was unequivocal: the law does not permit an accused to challenge the very system they are evading from abroad.
"How can criminal cases be closed unless the accused submits himself to the court’s authority?" the bench questioned during the proceedings. The court emphasized that Mallya must demonstrate a genuine intent to participate in the legal process in person before his petitions can proceed.
The Government’s Stance: Mockery of the Legal System
Representing the Union of India, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly opposed the plea for a remote hearing. He argued that allowing fugitives to litigate from afar sets a dangerous precedent.
"Several fugitives are living abroad comfortably and even celebrating publicly, which mocks the Indian legal system," Mehta stated. He urged the judiciary not to entertain "remote-controlled" petitions from individuals who refuse to face trial on Indian soil. The government further noted that extradition proceedings against Mallya in the UK are currently at an "advanced stage."
Mallya’s Defense: Financial Restitution as a Shield
Mallya’s counsel, Senior Advocate Amit Desai, attempted to pivot the argument toward financial settlement. He claimed that the recovery made by banks has already far exceeded the original debt.
- Alleged Loan Default: Approximately ₹6,200 crore.
- Total Recoveries: Reported to have crossed ₹14,000 crore.
Desai argued that since the financial liability has been effectively neutralized through the attachment and sale of assets by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the matter should be closed. However, the bench countered this by stating that repayment does not erase criminal responsibility.
Analysis: The FEO Act and Property Rights
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) maintains that Mallya is responsible for bank fraud and money laundering totaling nearly ₹15,000 crore (including interest). The FEO Act was specifically enacted to prevent high-value offenders (cases exceeding ₹100 crore) from exploiting international borders to stall justice.
While Mallya argues that the confiscation of his properties violates his fundamental rights, the ED maintains that the law includes provisions for the restoration of assets upon acquittal—but only if the accused returns to face the trial.
Next Steps: February 12 Deadline
The court has granted Mallya’s legal team time until February 12 to make a "conscious decision." He currently has two petitions pending:
- A challenge to the application of the FEO law against him.
- A challenge to the constitutional validity of the FEO law itself.
The bench clarified that both cannot be heard simultaneously and insisted on a clear commitment regarding his return to India.
Final Thoughts from TheTrendingPeople.com
The Bombay High Court’s ruling reinforces a growing judicial trend in India: accountability is not optional. While Vijay Mallya remains the "King of Good Times" in London, the Indian courts are making it clear that the "Good Times" do not extend to evading the law. By demanding a physical return, the court is upholding the principle that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done within the jurisdiction of the land.