Mallya extradition trial's next hearing date remains uncertain
London: The next submissions hearing in the extradition trial of Vijay Mallya over alleged fraud and money laundering amounting to Rs 9,000 crores remains uncertain as the lawyers are yet to agree on a mutually convenient date.
Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot was listed to hear the case at Westminster Magistrates Court today, with the 62- year-old embattled liquor baron exempt from attending.
However, the case was not discussed in the court as the lawyers are yet to agree on a mutually convenient date.
The next hearing date is expected within the next few weeks, to be determined internally between the legal counsels and announced at a later date.
The case had been left undecided over the issue of admissibility of evidence presented by the Indian authorities at a hearing earlier this month.
Judge Arbuthnot is set to rule on the issue once Mallya's defence team completes its argument claiming "absence of a strong prima facie case" and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), arguing on behalf of the Indian government, responds in favour of the evidence.
Meanwhile, Mallya s bail on an extradition warrant has been extended until April 2.
The next hearing is expected to also lead to a time-frame for closing arguments and verdict in the case, which seeks to establish that there are no bars to Mallya being extradited to India to stand trial on the charges of fraud and money laundering.
A senior official had confirmed that the Indian government has now presented all clarifications sought by the judge during a hearing in the case in December, including regular medical assistance that will be made available to the businessman at Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai where he is to be held.
At the last hearing on January 11, Mallya's barrister Clare Montgomery argued that evidence that was claimed as a "blueprint of dishonesty" by the CPS was in fact privileged conversation between Mallya and his lawyer about "legal advice in clear contemplation of litigation" and hence should be inadmissible.
On a separate category of evidence presented by the Indian government, Montgomery questioned the reliability of investigating officers in the case. She pointed to over 150 pages of "near identical material" purporting to be statement of witnesses taken under Section 161 of the Indian CrPC.
Dismissing the nature and source of these witness statements, Mallya s defence claimed they do not meet "obligations" under the India-UK extradition treaty to provide "proper" statements.
The Indian authorities have stressed that they are confident the evidence meets all the requirements under the treaty.
Mallya was arrested by Scotland Yard on an extradition warrant in April 2017 and has been out on bail on a bond worth 650,000 pounds.
Chief Magistrate Arbuthnot will present her ruling within a timeframe she sets out at the end of the trial. If she rules in favour of the Indian government, the UK home secretary will have two months to sign Mallya's extradition order.
However, both sides will have the chance to appeal in higher courts in the UK against the chief magistrate's verdict.
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.
4% quota for Muslim contractors: BJP to challenge K'taka's 'unconstitutional move' in court
New Delhi/Bengaluru, Mar 17 (PTI): The BJP on Monday termed the Karnataka government’s proposal to provide four per cent reservation to Muslims in government contracts an "unconstitutional misadventure" and said it will oppose the move at all levels, including challenging it in court, until it is rolled back.
The ruling Congress in Karnataka and the BJP hit out at each other over the issue in the Assembly.
Earlier on Friday, the Cabinet approved an amendment to the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTPP) Act, reserving four per cent of contracts for Muslims in civil works valued up to Rs two crore and goods/services contracts up to Rs one crore.
"The BJP firmly opposes the proposed unconstitutional move and demands that the Siddaramaiah government immediately roll it back," BJP MP Tejasvi Surya, who represents the Bangalore South Lok Sabha seat, told a press conference at the party headquarters in New Delhi.
He alleged that the Siddaramaiah-led government’s decision was a "calculated move" to appease Muslims, "at the direction and patronage of the Congress top leadership, particularly Rahul Gandhi."
"This patently unconstitutional and prima facie illegal act will be challenged in court. The BJP will fight against the move both inside the Assembly and on the streets. We will also raise the issue in Parliament and protest outside it," Surya said.
The BJP MP said that the Karnataka government’s move is a threat to national integrity, unity, and sovereignty.
"We will fight and oppose this in the courtroom. We will take the fight to the people of Karnataka. Until this unconstitutional move is rolled back, the BJP’s fight will continue," he added.
Meanwhile, in the Karnataka Assembly, the ruling Congress and the BJP once again sparred on Monday over the budgetary provision of four per cent reservation for Muslims in government contracts.
The Congress rejected the BJP’s allegation that religion-based reservation is "against constitutional provisions."
Defending the reservation, Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar said that Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, and Buddhists are citizens of this country.
"We have concerns for minorities and backward communities. When the BJP says it wants to take everyone along, let it appoint Christian and Muslim ministers. Only then does BJP state president B Y Vijayendra have the right to speak about equality. Let him read the state anthem written by Kuvempu—then he will understand what makes Karnataka a peaceful garden," Shivakumar told reporters.
Hitting back at Shivakumar, Vijayendra said that it was the BJP government, not the Congress, that had appointed Dr A P J Abdul Kalam as the President of India.
"We appointed Najma Heptulla, Justice Abdul Nazeer, and Arif Mohammed Khan as governors. Musician Ustad Bismillah Khan was bestowed with the Bharat Ratna by the BJP government," Vijayendra told reporters.
According to him, Congress's appeasement politics is not new.
He questioned the Congress party’s concern for Dalits, asking where it was when its MLA Akhanda Srinivasa Murthy’s house was "torched by Muslim hooligans".
The Leader of the Opposition in the Karnataka Assembly, R Ashoka, claimed that several Supreme Court judgments have stated that there is no provision in the Constitution for religion-based reservations.
"Yet, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah wore a ‘topi’ (skull cap), organised Tipu Jayanti, and introduced Shaadi Bhagya (launched in 2013, it provides financial assistance to economically backward minority women). He gave grants to Muslims beyond what they had asked for. Now, by offering four per cent reservation in contracts to Muslims, the Congress government has made an assault on Hindus," he alleged.
Ashoka argued that there had never been a religion-based contract system in Karnataka, but the government had introduced one, which could lead to conflicts between communities.
In the Karnataka Legislative Council, Leader of the Opposition, Chalavadi Narayanaswamy raised the issue.
He said that religion-based reservation is "not allowed under the Constitution."
"You have granted four per cent reservation to Muslims in contracts. We oppose religion-based reservations. I urge the government through you not to implement it," he stated.
Countering him, Congress MLA B K Hariprasad asserted that the reservation aligns with constitutional provisions.
