Mallya denies repayment offer linked to Fugitive Ordinance
Bengaluru, June 27: Claiming that he had honestly tried to repay bank loans since 2016, beleaguered tycoon Vijay Mallya on Wednesday denied his offer to settle the dues was linked to the Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance.
"It is incorrect that my settlement offer before the Karnataka HC was motivated by the latest chargesheet under the media reported Fugitive Ordinance. I always had honest intentions to settle and there is ample proof," tweeted Mallya, a day after he broke silence on defaulting bank loans.
The May 27 Ordinance gives the law enforcing agencies powers to attach and confiscate the proceeds of crime and properties of economic offenders like bank defaulters or bank fraudsters fleeing the country, and is aimed at deterring economic offenders from evading the process of law by remaining outside the jurisdiction of Indian courts, a probe agency official told IANS here.
The 62-year-old liquor baron, who fled the country on March 2, 2016, has been living in London since then despite summons from Indian courts and law enforcement agencies to appear before them for trial in various related cases.
"I am asked for comment on being labelled a fugitive economic offender. When I have placed assets on the table before the Karnataka High Court in excess of the bank claims, how can I be an economic offender? The fugitive part falls away," said Mallya in another tweet.
Referring to some people asking him why he chose to make a statement at this time, he said he did so because he and his United Breweries Holding Ltd (UBHL) have filed an application before the high court on June 22, setting out assets worth Rs 13,900 crore.
"I made my media statement concurrent with my settlement offer now and was unable to make such an offer before due to various circumstantial changes about the value of my assets available," he tweeted.
He stressed the chargesheets of the Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate allege criminality with no intention to repay banks although he had been making efforts to settle since 2016.
"As I have placed everything before the high court, where is the malafide? Are banks interested in repayment?" he asked.
Admitting that the government, courts and banks were rightfully concerned about public money loaned to his now defunct Kingfisher Airline by the state-run banks, Mallya said he showed to the high court having assets in excess of the banks' claims and requested their sale under its supervision.
"The government wants to recover money loaned by the state-run banks. It used CBI and ED to attach and recover. I have placed all assets before the high court and submitted for sale. Banks should be very happy. But if the same CBI and ED object, what do I do?" he asked.
Regretting that the official narrative seemed to question his intentions, Mallya also denied delaying tactics or any agenda to score brownie points.
"What needs to be appreciated is a bona fide offer and commitment placed before the high court. Let Justice play its part," he pointed out.
Responding to the comment of Minister of State for External Affairs M. J. Akbar that he had years to repay the loans, Mallya said his settlement initiatives date back to 2016.
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.
Why can't Centre say it will consider genuine grievances of farmers? SC asks
New Delhi, Jan 2: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre why couldn't it say its doors were open and it would consider the genuine grievances of farmers protesting over various demands, including the legal guarantee of minimum support price for crops.
Further, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan asked the Centre to respond to the fresh plea filed on behalf of farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal seeking direction to the Union government for implementation of the proposal, including a legal guarantee of MSP on crops, made to the protesting farmers in 2021, after the farm laws were repealed.
"Why can't your client make a statement that it will consider the genuine demands and we are open to discuss the grievances of farmers, our doors are open? Why can't the Central government make a statement?" the bench asked solicitor general Tushar Mehta.
"Perhaps the court is not aware of various factors weighing in," he said, "therefore, right now we are confining ourselves to the issue of health of one individual. The Central government is concerned with each and every farmer."
Petitioner in-person Guninder Kaur Gill, who filed the fresh plea on behalf of Dallewal, was asked not to adopt a confrontational approach as the court had constituted a high-powered committee headed by retired high court judge to deal with various such issues.
"You are asking for compliance of the proposal. How can we direct the compliance of the proposal? You have to bring something more on record. We are issuing notice on this. But think of something. Let us not go with the confrontation… Please don't think of confrontation," said the bench.
Gill said the issue was resolved in 2021, when a proposal for the guarantee was adopted.
"The matter was already resolved into a guarantee. Last two-three lines of the proposal make it amply clear that it was a guarantee on the part of the Central government… It was a commitment and a promise on the basis of which the farmers withdrew their andolan (agitation). Now, they (Centre) cannot go back," she said.
Committee after committee were being constituted to resolve the same issues, added Gill.
The court said it had "full faith" in the committee, headed by a former judge who, in a way, had roots in the agriculture sector from both Punjab and Haryana.
"We have included experts from Punjab and Haryana, who are agriculturist, economist and professors. They are all learned, neutral fellows and their names came from both sides. Now that the committee is there, why are you not moving through a platform? We cannot directly have dialogue with the farmers. Probably, the central government, whatever may be the good or bad reasons, it is for them to take a decision," said Justice Surya Kant.
The bench directed a copy of the petition to be served upon the member secretary of the high-powered committee, which is likely to hold talks with the protesting farmers and other stakeholders on January 3.
It asked the Centre and the committee to file their responses to the fresh petition filed on behalf of Dallewal within 10 days.
Dallewal has been on an indefinite fast at the Khanauri border point between Punjab and Haryana since November 26 to press the Centre to accept the farmers' various demands.
The farmers under the banner of Samyukta Kisan Morcha (non-political) and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha have been camping at Shambhu and Khanauri border points between Punjab and Haryana since February 13, 2024, after their march to Delhi was stopped by the security forces.
