Facing New Risk, Vijay Mallya ‘Sends Feelers’ About Return: Officials
NEW DELHI: Vijay Mallya, the embattled tycoon wanted in India on loan default and money-laundering charges, is reported to have sent feelers to central agencies and the government that he is willing to come back to the country to face the law, sources in the Enforcement Directorate, which fights financial crimes, have said.
Officials have indicated that the offer was prompted by the government's decision to invoke a brand-new law to confiscate his assets in Delhi.
The former liquor baron is the first person to face a case in a Mumbai court under the country's brand-new law that empowers courts to order seizure of properties left behind by fugitives who flee the country. The Enforcement Directorate had last month asked a Mumbai court to declare Vijay Mallya as a fugitive under this law.
There has been no comment from Vijay Mallya to reports of his offer to return.
The 62-year-old former liquor baron had earlier contested India's request to extradite him from Britain to face charges of fraud and money laundering in India.
A court in London is hearing the case of Indian investigators for the liquor tycoon's extradition to face trial in India.
The flamboyant businessman left India in 2016 when the banks were attempting to recover nearly Rs. 9,000 crores in unpaid loans to Kingfisher Airlines, a premium airline he started in 2005 and shut down seven years later.
Last month, he had offered to settle all his outstanding dues in a case being heard by the Karnataka High Court. He later told news agency Reuters that the assets placed before the high court were worth $ 2 billion which was much more than sufficient to repay creditors.
He had also rejected suggestions that it was linked to moves to declare him a fugitive under the new law.
A special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court in Mumbai had last month issued summons to the beleaguered businessman to appear before it on August 27 on the Enforcement Directorate's plea seeking action against him under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance in the over Rs. 9,000 crore bank fraud case.
The central probe agency, as part of this action, has also sought immediate confiscation of assets worth around Rs. 12,500 crore of Mallya.
If he does not appear before the court or respond to its summons on the designated date, Mallya risks being declared a fugitive economic offender, besides properties linked to him being confiscated.
courtesy : ndtv.com
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Karnataka High Court upholds governor's sanction to prosecute CM Siddaramaiah in MUDA case
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's plea challenging the Governor's sanction to prosecute him in connection with the alleged Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) scam.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna stated that the complaint required investigation and upheld the Governor’s authority to grant approval for prosecution.
The court also noted that it is the complainants' duty to seek approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Governor has the discretion to take an independent decision.
The Judge said, “The facts narrated in the petition need investigation,” and dismissed the plea.
The interim order from August 19, which had deferred proceedings against the CM in the trial court, was also dissolved. The court refused to stay the operation of this order, with a detailed copy of the judgment expected by 2:30 p.m.
Siddaramaiah’s plea sought to quash Governor Thaawar Chand Gehlot’s decision to sanction his prosecution in connection with a multi-crore scam involving MUDA. The CM’s legal team, led by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued that the Governor’s sanction was issued without due reasoning and violated statutory mandates, including Article 163 of the Indian Constitution, which requires the Governor to act on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
On the other hand, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Governor's office, defended the sanction, asserting that it was granted after a thorough review and that natural justice principles were not applicable at this stage of the investigation.
The petition pertained to the Governor's August 17 sanction for investigation and prosecution under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
