[ By Bobby Anthony ]Fugitive economic offender and willful defaulter Vijay Mallya appeared before the Royal Courts of Justice in London recently for his appeal against extradition to India, where his lawyers claimed “multiple errors” in a court order.Representatives from India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) were present in the London court...
Fugitive economic offender and willful defaulter Vijay Mallya appeared before the Royal Courts of Justice in London recently for his appeal against extradition to India, where his lawyers claimed “multiple errors” in a court order.
Representatives from India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) were present in the London court as Mallya’s lawyer Clare Montgomery raised questions about whether the CBI had behaved “properly in bringing charges” against Mallya under former Special Director Rakesh Asthana, who she said, may have been guilty of “misconduct”.
India wants to get back Mallya, 64, whose business interests have ranged from aviation to liquor, as well as more than USD 1.4 billion in loans Kingfisher availed from Indian banks which Indian authorities argued, he had no intention of repaying.
Mallya has been on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April 2017.
His lawyer Montgomery also told the High Court that that Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot's verdict in favor of his extradition to India in December 2018 is “flawed” and questioned the admissibility of some witness statements submitted by the Indian government.
Mallya’s lawyer Montgomery argued in the court that he had no fraudulent intentions when he sought bank loans for his now defunct Kingfisher Airlines.
It was argued by his lawyer Montgomery that Mallya is no “fly by night figure but an immensely wealthy man” who never ran any kind of “ponzi scheme” but a reputable airline, which fell into economic misfortune along with other Indian airlines.
Mallya’s lawyer Montgomery argued that Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot did not look at all of the evidence because if she had, she would not have fallen into multiple errors which permeate her judgment.
In 2018, Chief Magistrate Arbuthnot had rejected Mallya's argument that the case was motivated by political considerations, and that he would not receive a fair trial in India or that extradition would infringe his human rights.
Further hearing is scheduled for three days with Vijay Mallya's lawyer Montgomery, to lay out her arguments, which the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on behalf of the Indian government is all set to counter.
A verdict may be delivered soon, but final judgment could be delayed to a later date depending on how the hearing progresses.