Bombay High Court Tells Vijay Mallya: Return to India or We Won’t Hear Your Plea

The Bombay High Court has made it clear that Vijay Mallya must return to India if he wants the Court to hear his petition challenging the validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018.

A Bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad said that Mallya cannot seek relief from Indian courts while staying in the United Kingdom and avoiding Indian authorities. The Court firmly stated that if he does not come back to India, his plea will not be considered.

Background of the Case

Mallya has challenged the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 (FEO Act) as well as the proceedings declaring him a fugitive economic offender.

Earlier, on December 23, the High Court had directed him to file an affidavit stating when he plans to return to India from the UK. The Court had also made it clear that his challenge to the law would not be heard unless he first submitted to the jurisdiction of the Indian court.

However, during the recent hearing, the Bench observed that Mallya had failed to file any affidavit indicating his intention to return.

Court’s Observations

The judges remarked that a person who is avoiding legal proceedings cannot take advantage of the court system. They pointed out that Mallya is allegedly evading both Indian and UK court processes and, in such circumstances, cannot expect the High Court to entertain his plea.

The Bench told him that returning to India is a necessary step if he wants the Court to examine his challenge to the FEO Act. At the same time, the Court clarified that it was not dismissing the petition yet and was giving him one more opportunity to comply with its directions.

The matter has been listed for hearing next week.

Arguments by the Enforcement Directorate

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate, argued that Mallya filed his challenge to the 2018 Act only after being declared a fugitive. He said that Mallya cannot question the law while refusing to submit himself to the jurisdiction of Indian courts.

Mehta also pointed out that extradition proceedings against Mallya in London are at an advanced stage. He argued that Mallya can return to India and raise all his arguments, including issues related to bank dues and liability, before the appropriate forum. However, he cannot show distrust in Indian law and still seek relief under its equitable jurisdiction.

The Court has asked the Solicitor General to provide a detailed timeline and relevant facts at the next hearing.

Defence’s Stand

Senior Advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Mallya, referred to a previous judgment to argue that the nature of the statute permits the Court to hear the matter even if Mallya is not physically present in India.

Despite this, the Bench emphasised that there is already an existing order requiring Mallya to clarify when he intends to return. Since he has not complied with that direction, the Court indicated that it may consider passing orders for non-compliance if the situation continues.

For now, the Court has granted one final opportunity before taking further action.