UK High Court allows Vijay Mallya to appeal against his extradition

In a reprieve to embattled liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya, the UK High Court Tuesday allowed him to appeal against his extradition order signed off by the UK home secretary Sajid Javid to face alleged fraud and money laundering charges amounting to Rs 9,000 crores in India.
A two-member bench of the Royal Courts of Justice comprising Justices George Leggatt and Andrew Popplewell made the conclusion after hearing the arguments.

The bench said that the arguments can be reasonably made on some of Westminster Magistrates' Court Chief Magistrate Judge Emma Arbuthnot's conclusions in her prima facie case ruling.
The High Court judges ruled that the 63-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss was permitted to appeal on only one limited ground to be able to address the admissibility of some of evidence and interpretations made by the lower court.
They have given directions to submit a draft for the appeal to proceed and ascertain the time frame for the hearing.
Ahead of the hearing, Mallya told reporters outside the court that he was feeling "positive".
Representatives from the Indian High Commission in London were present in court to observe the proceedings.
Mallya, accompanied by his son Sidharth and partner Pinky Lalwani, watched from the bench as his barrister Clare Montgomery began by reiterating many of her arguments laid out during the extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court last year and characterised aspects of Chief Magistrate's ruling as "plain wrong".
She claimed to have "chased down" and countered many of the claims in the case put forward by the Indian authorities and dismissed the conclusion that there was a "clear and unequivocal false statement" made by Mallya about profits being made by a struggling Kingfisher Airlines at the time the loans were being sought.
"The conclusions are in effect a false dichotomy… [Arbuthnot] failed to recognise that there was a straightforward business failure," said Montgomery, as she claimed the case presented by the Indian authorities had moved on in essence from that ruled upon by the lower court.
She also questioned the admissibility of many witness statements and once again highlighted the badly paginated documents submitted by the government of India in the extradition case.
The judges made a few interventions to indicate that the offence for which Mallya is wanted by the Indian justice system is not materially different between English and Indian law.
"Your starting point is that the judge [Arbuthnot] has made findings of a prima facie case on allegations that you haven't had a chance to answer," noted Judge Leggatt, in an early observation on the grounds for the appeal.
The ruling was a reprieve for Mallya, who has lost a UK High Court “leave to appeal” on paper, leading to an oral hearing of his renewal application this week.
The case will now proceed to a full hearing stage at the UK High Court. Meanwhile, Mallya has continued to make a series of interventions on social media to offer "100 per cent payback" to state-owned Indian banks to cover his now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines' debt. He remains on bail on an extradition warrant executed by Scotland Yard in April 2017, involving a bail bond worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his travel.
At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London last December, Judge Arbuthnot had found "clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds" and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS.

Vijay Mallya first businessman to be declared 'fugitive economic offender'

A special court in Mumbai Saturday declared absconding liquor baron Vijay Mallya a fugitive economic offender (FEO) on a plea of the Enforcement Directorate.

Mallya has become the first businessman to be declared EFO under the provisions of the new Fugitive Economic Offenders Act which came into existence in August last year.
The ED had requested the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court that Mallya, who is currently in the UK, be declared a fugitive and his properties be confiscated and brought under the control of the Union government as per the provisions of the new FEO Act.
Special judge MS Azmi declared Mallya an FEO under Section 12 of the Act after hearing extensive arguments from the lawyer of Mallya and the ED counsel.
Mallya, accused of defaulting on loan repayments and money laundering, had left India in March 2016.

After over a year, Vijay Mallya extradition case heads for ruling on Monday

Embattled liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya is scheduled to return to Westminster Magistrates' Court in London on Monday when his extradition trial is listed for a judgment hand-down.
The 62-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, wanted in India on alleged fraud and money laundering charges amounting to an estimated Rs 90 billion, has been on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April last year.
He has contested his extradition on the grounds that the case against him is "politically motivated" and the loans he has been accused of defrauding on were sought to keep his now-defunct airline afloat.

"I did not borrow a single rupee. The borrower was Kingfisher Airlines. Money was lost due to a genuine and sad business failure. Being held as guarantor is not fraud," he said in his recent Twitter post on the issue.
"I have offered to repay 100 per cent of the principal amount to them. Please take it," he tweeted earlier.
ALSO READ: SC agrees to hear Vijay Mallya plea against fugitive economic offender tag
While dismissing that his intervention has anything to do with the extradition case, it came just days before Judge Emma Arbuthnot is expected to present her ruling in the case.
The trial, which opened at the Magistrates' Court on December 4 last year, has gone through a series of hearings beyond the initial seven days earmarked for it.
It opened with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) team, led by Mark Summers, laying out the Indian government's prima facie case of fraud and money laundering against Mallya.
Summers sought to establish a "blueprint of dishonesty" against the businessman and that there are no bars to his extradition on human rights grounds.
ALSO READ: Have offered to repay 100% to banks, please take it, says Vijay Mallya
Mallya's defence team, led by Clare Montgomery, deposed a series of experts in an attempt to prove that the erstwhile Kingfisher Airlines' alleged default of bank loans was the result of business failure rather than "dishonest" and "fraudulent" activity by its owner.
The court was also told that a consortium of Indian banks, led by State Bank of India (SBI), had rejected an offer by the liquor baron in early 2016 to pay back nearly 80 per cent of the principal loan amount owed to them.
While the CPS argued that Mallya never intended to repay the loans he sought in the first place because his airline's demise was inevitable, the defence tried to establish that Kingfisher Airlines was suffering from consequences of a wider global financial crisis around 2009-2010 and that its failure was a result of factors beyond the company's control.
"There are clear signs that the banks seem to have gone against their own guidelines [in sanctioning some of the loans]," Judge Arbuthnot had noted during the course of the trial.

ALSO READ: UK court allows Indian banks to pursue surplus money from Mallya yacht sale
In relation to the defence's attempts to dispute Indian prison conditions as a bar to Mallya's extradition on human rights grounds, the judge had indicated to the CPS that she did not require any further information in reference to the prison conditions awaiting Mallya at Barrack 12 of Mumbai's Arthur Road Jail after seeking a video of the cell.
"If the judge is satisfied that all of the procedural requirements are met, and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply, he or she must send the case to the Secretary of State for a decision to be taken on whether to order extradition," explains Pavani Reddy, a UK-based legal expert and Managing Partner of Zaiwalla & Co.
The judge's decision on whether to send Mallya's case to UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid can be appealed with the UK High Court's permission, with the person to be extradited entitled to make an application for permission to appeal to the High Court within 14 days of the date of the Chief Magistrate's ruling.
ALSO READ: Vijay Mallya cooperating, left India in 'normal course': Lawyer tells court
On the other hand, the Indian government would also have 14 days to file leave to appeal to the High Court, seeking permission to appeal against a decision not to extradite.
"In case the concerned individual does not file an appeal, and Secretary of State agrees with the magistrate's decision, then the individual must be extradited from the UK within 28 days of the Home Secretary's extradition order."
"This will also apply if an appeal lodged by either party in the High Court is unsuccessful, but the 28 days will commence from the date when the appeal hearing was concluded," said Reddy.
If the judgment goes ahead as scheduled on Monday, it would mark a significant point in this high-profile extradition trial that has lasted over a year.

Give us Mallya, we'll give him the toilet he wants: Modi govt to UK court

The Narendra Modi government gave an assurance on Tuesday to the British court hearing its application for the extradition of businessman Vijay Mallya to India that if sent back, Mallya will be provided a private western style toilet and wash facilities at Mumbai's Arthur Road prison, where he is proposed to be held.
Barrister Mark Summers, appearing for the British Crown Prosecution Service on behalf of the Government of India, said: “The Indian government will honour these assurances.” He had earlier submitted a third letter of assurance on the subject to the court, presided over by the Chief Magistrate of the Westminster Magistrates' Court Emma Arbuthnot.
Mallya was the owner of the now defunct Kingfisher Airlines, which is alleged to owe Rs 90 billion to Indian banks, his figure being Rs 55 billion. He is liable as he provided his personal guarantee in drawing the money. The extradition matter, though, is only about Rs 7.5 billion borrowed from IDBI Bank, where he and executives of the bank are accused of conspiracy and fraud. Mallya denies the charge and is otherwise a significant shareholder in United Breweries, which produces Kingfisher Beer.
Attempting to allay the British judiciary's historical concern about prison conditions in India, further undertakings given by the Modi regime were, Mallya would not be exposed to overcrowding in the prison, and that he would be kept in a separate compound which is “clean and hygienic”. Five photos of western style toilets were presented to convince the court that acceptable standards would be extended to Mallya.
ALSO READ: UK court wants video of Mumbai jail where Vijay Mallya might be kept
Summers also informed the court that Mallya would not be kept in a prison meant for convicts “during pre-trial or trial periods or after conviction”. He was at pains to impress upon Arbuthnot that the barrack where Mallya will be kept if extradited, “has recently been renovated and has structural stability”. He then produced a series of photographs to try and establish that Mallya will enjoy sunlight in his cell - another sticking point in British courts allowing extradition requests from India. He then put it to the court that no inspection of the Arthur Road facilities by the British court was required.
Arguing for Mallya, Barrister Claire Montgomery rejected the Indian government's claims. She maintained: “The photos cannot be relied on.” She quoted an expert who had been shown the pictures as saying: “It is very difficult to work out where the light was coming from.” She implied the photos of the cell had been taken by showering artificial light on it. Arbuthnot finally ordered a video of the cell to be taken at midday and handed in “within three weeks” or by August 21. Summers, consulting Rakesh Asthana of the Central Bureau of Investigation who was present in the court, offered to do. What was scheduled to be the final hearing in the case which has been dragging for over a year, in fact, transpired to an abbreviated half-hour session, as the magistrate was reported to be feeling under the weather. The next hearing was posted for September 12.

ALSO READ: Vijay Mallya's Force India F1 team put into administration by London court
Prior to that, on August 3 the Bangalore High Court is expected to hear Mallya's application for selling if his assets worth an estimated Rs 130 billion placed before it.
Meanwhile, Mallya's Force India Formula One racing company went into administration last week and there is speculation that it could soon change hands. Mallya is, however, said to be resisting this. Force India's deputy team principal Bob Fernley described Mallya as being "devastated" by the turn of events. He, however, claimed Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs had dismissed a hearing on a winding-up order as, according to him, all dues had been settled by the firm. There are reports of there being five bidders for the Silverstone based unit, but at the same time whispers that the company could come out of administration.

UK court entitled to take assets in my name, can't go a step beyond: Mallya

Embattled Indian tycoon Vijay Mallya said on Sunday he will comply fully with court enforcement officers seeking to seize his British assets, but there was not much for them to take as his family's lavish residences were not in his name.
India wants to extradite the 62-year-old former liquor baron from Britain to face charges of fraud as a group of Indian banks seek to recover more than $1 billion of loans granted to his defunct Kingfisher Airlines.

A verdict is expected by early September, with July 31 the final date for closing oral submissions and appeals likely whatever the outcome.
Speaking to Reuters at the British Formula One Grand Prix, where he is principal and co-owner of the Force India team, Mallya said he would hand over British assets held in his name. But a luxury country residence belonged to his children and a house in London belonged to his mother, making them untouchable.
"I have given the UK court on affidavit a statement of my UK assets. Which, pursuant to the freezing order, they are entitled to take and hand over to the banks," he said. "There's a few cars, a few items of jewellery and I said 'OK, fine. You don't have to bother to come to my house to seize them. I'll physically hand them over. Tell me the time, date and place.'"
"There's no question of being homeless because at the end of the day, they are entitled to take my assets in my name declared on oath to the court. They can't go one step beyond," he said.
'FUGITIVE ECONOMIC OFFENDER'
Mallya said a super-yacht he used for entertaining at races in Monaco and Abu Dhabi, which was recently sold at auction in Malta after a dispute over unpaid crew wages, was not his problem either.
"I have not owned the Indian Empress boat for more than seven years now," he said. It had belonged to "a Middle Eastern gentleman", whose name he would not disclose, in a deal that gave Mallya use of it for one month a year, he said.
Mallya has been in Britain since he left India in March 2016, unable to travel after his passport was revoked, so the annual British Grand Prix is the only race he has been able to attend since then.
The Indian government's Enforcement Directorate, which fights financial crimes, is seeking to declare him a "fugitive economic offender" and to confiscate 125 billion rupees worth of his assets.
Mallya has denied the charges, decried a "political witchhunt" and has said he is seeking to sell assets worth about 139 billion rupees ($2.04 billion) to repay creditors.
"I think the overriding consideration that everybody seems to be missing is that I have put $2 billion worth of assets in front of the Karnataka high court which is more than sufficient to repay the banks and indeed everybody else," he said.
"So the question of attaching assets either in the UK or whatever should not arise."
Mallya repeated recent complaints on Twitter that Indian criminal enforcement agencies had frozen assets in India so he could not sell them, while banks continued to tot up interest.
He said the enforcement directorate had also attached assets inherited from his father, including properties acquired in the 1920s, under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
"How can those be proceeds of crime? This is the injustice that is happening," he said.
The former billionaire, at one time dubbed the 'King of Good Times' and a former member of the upper house of the Indian parliament, bridled at being branded a 'fugitive'.
"I was always a resident of England and a non-resident of India. So where else do I come back to? So where's the running away concept? It's just become too political," he said.
"And now in an (Indian) election year, I guess what they want to do is bring me back and hang me on the holy cross and hope to get more votes."

UK High Court allows seizure of Vijay Mallya's UK assets

A UK High Court judge has issued an enforcement order in favour of a consortium of 13 Indian banks, seeking to recover funds owed to them by beleaguered liquor baron Vijay Mallya who is fighting extradition to India on fraud and money laundering charges worth nearly Rs 90 billion.
The order grants permission to the UK High Court Enforcement Officer to enter the 62-year-old tycoon's properties in Hertfordshire, near London.

ALSO READ: Police identified Mallya's 159 properties, couldn't attach them: Court told
It permits the officer and his agents entry to Ladywalk and Bramble Lodge in Tewin, Welwyn, where Mallya is currently based. However, it is not an instruction to enter, which means the banks have the option to use the order as one of the means to recover estimated funds of around 1.145 billion pounds.
"The High Court Enforcement Officer, including any enforcement agents acting under his authority, may enter Ladywalk, Queen Hoo Lane, Tewin, Welwyn and Bramble Lodge, Queen Hoo Lane, Tewin, Welwyn, including all outbuildings of Ladywalk and Bramble Lodge to search for and take control of goods belonging to the First Defendant (Mallya)," notes the order by Justice Byran, dated June 26.
"The High Court Enforcement Officer, including any Enforcement Agent acting under his authority, may use reasonable force to enter the Property if necessary," it states.
According to legal experts with knowledge of the case, the latest order by the High Court's Queen's Bench Division is the granting of permission, should it be required, while the banks consider "all the enforcement options available to them".
The order relates to the UK's Tribunal Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and follows a UK High Court ruling in May, which refused to overturn a worldwide order freezing Mallya's assets and upheld an Indian court's ruling that the Indian banks were entitled to recover funds. It marked the first recorded case of a judgment of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in India being registered by the English High Court, setting a legal precedent.
The victory for the 13 Indian banks which include State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Corporation bank, Federal Bank Ltd, IDBI Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Jammu & Kashmir Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, Punjab National Bank, State Bank of Mysore, UCO Bank, United Bank of India and JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt Ltd enables them to enforce the Indian judgment against Mallya's assets in England and Wales.
Mallya has made an application in the Court of Appeal seeking permission to appeal against the order, which remains pending.

Mallya summoned by PMLA court on Aug 27 under fugitive offenders ordinance

A special PMLA court here today summoned beleaguered liquor baron Vijay Mallya 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 90 bn bank fraud case.
Special judge M S Azmi, dealing with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cases, issued the notice to Mallya after taking cognisance of the second ED charge sheet filed against him recently and a subsequent application by it on June 22 seeking a fugitive economic offenders tag.

This is the first time that action has been initiated under the ordinance recently promulgated by the Modi government to deal with fugitive bank loan defaulters.
The agency has also sought immediate confiscation of assets worth around Rs 125 bn of Mallya and other fugitive economic offenders, they said.
If Mallya does not appear before the court, he risks being declared a fugitive economic offender, besides properties linked to him being confiscated.
The court had earlier issued non-bailable warrants against the beleaguered businessman in the two cases filed by the ED.
Mallya, his now defunct venture Kingfisher Airlines Limited and others availed loans from various banks during the tenure of the UPA-I government and the outstanding amount, including interest, against him is Rs 99.90 bn at present, the officials said.
Mallya had recently said that he has become the "poster boy" of bank default and a lightning rod for public anger.
He said he had written letters to both the prime minister and the finance minister on April 15, 2016 to explain his side of the story.
"No response was received from either of them," Mallya, who is based in London, had said in a statement.
"I have been accused by politicians and the media alike of having stolen and run away with Rs 90 bn that was loaned to Kingfisher Airlines (KFA). Some of the lending banks have also labelled me a wilful defaulter," he said.
The ED has furnished evidences in its two charge sheets, filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in the past, to make a case for seeking a fugitive offender tag for Mallya from the court.
Mallya is contesting the money laundering charges in London after India initiated extradition proceedings against the liquor baron to bring him back to the country.
Both the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) have filed cases for alleged loan default against him.
The Modi government brought the ordinance as "there have been instances of economic offenders fleeing the jurisdiction of Indian courts, anticipating the commencement, or during the pendency, of criminal proceedings".
The ordinance has provisions for special courts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 to declare a person as a fugitive economic offender and order immediate confiscation of assets.
"A fugitive economic offender is a person against whom an arrest warrant has been issued in respect of a scheduled offence and who has left India so as to avoid criminal prosecution, or being abroad, refuses to return to India to face criminal prosecution," the government said.
The cases of frauds, cheque dishonour or loan default of over Rs 1 bn would come under the ambit of the ordinance.
The measure offers necessary constitutional safeguards in terms of providing hearing to the person through counsel, allowing him time to file a reply, serving notice of summons to him, whether in India or abroad and appeal before a high court.

ED set to file fresh charge sheet against Vijay Mallya for money laundering

In more trouble for liquor baron Vijay Mallya, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is set to soon file a fresh charge sheet against him and his companies on charges of money laundering and allegedly creating a consortium of nationalised banks to the tune of Rs 60.27 billion, officials said on Sunday.
With this charge sheet (also known as the prosecution complaint), official sources told PTI, the central probe agency will immediately seek from a court permission to "confiscate" more than Rs 90 billion worth assets of the beleaguered businessman and his firms under the recently promulgated Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance.

The ED last year had filed its first charge sheet against Mallya, now in London, in the about Rs 9 billion IDBI bank-Kingfisher Airlines (KFA) alleged bank loan fraud case.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

It has attached assets worth Rs 98.90 billion in this case till now.
The forthcoming charge sheet will revolve around the complaint received from the State Bank of India (SBI) on behalf of the consortium of banks for causing loss of Rs 60.27 billion to them by not keeping repayment commitments of his loan (by Mallya firms) taken during 2005-10, they said.
The ED has based its investigation in this instance after taking cognisance of a CBI FIR and the charge sheet will be filed before a special court in Mumbai under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
It was alleged that SBI and its consortium banks had advanced various credit facilities to KFALimited during the period between 2005 and 2010.
During 2009-10, the company failed to meet its repayment commitments to the bank from whom it had availed credit facilities and the airlines did not keep its account with the consortium banks regular which became NPA (non performing asset), the CBI FIR had stated.
The consortium banks, therefore, recalled credit facilities and also invoked corporate guarantee of UBHL (united breweries holdings limited) and personal guarantee of Mallya, it had alleged.
It was alleged that there was a conspiracy among group companies promoter and unknown others to cheat the lenders, the CBI had said.
The ED, officials said, had found that a maze of shell or dummy firms were used to allegedly siphon off these funds and this is expected to be stated in the upcoming charge sheet.
The agency, empowered by the Union government to enact the new fugitive ordinance in the country, will seek an official declaration to categorise Mallya as a "fugitive" on the basis of the cognisance of this prosecution complaint (charge sheet).
Mallya is contesting these charges in London as part of India's efforts to extradite him from there and face the legal system here in connection with these charges.
The central probe agency had recently begun the work to bring together the existing cases of high-value bank loan defaulters for getting them notified under the new legislation.
As per the existing process of law under the PMLA, the ED can confiscate assets only after trial in a case finishes which usually takes many years.
The Modi government brought the ordinance as "there have been instances of economic offenders fleeing the jurisdiction of Indian courts, anticipating the commencement, or during the pendency, of criminal proceedings," the government said.
The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2018 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on March 12 but couldnt be taken up due to logjam in Parliament over different issues.
With Parliament being adjourned sine die, an ordinance was proposed.
The Union Cabinet on April 21 approved the ordinance and the President gave his assent to promulgation of the same a day later.
The ordinance makes provisions for special courts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 to declare a person as a fugitive economic offender and order immediate confiscation of assets.
"A Fugitive Economic Offender is a person against whom an arrest warrant has been issued in respect of a scheduled offence and who has left India so as to avoid criminal prosecution, or being abroad, refuses to return to India to face criminal prosecution," the government said.
Cases of frauds, cheque dishonour or loan default of over Rs 1 billon would come under the ambit of this ordinance.
The ordinance offers necessary constitutional safeguards in terms of providing hearing to the person through counsel, allowing him time to file a reply, serving notice of summons to him, whether in India or abroad and appeal before the high court.

Grounds to regard Vijay Mallya a 'fugitive from justice': UK High Court

Liquor baron Vijay Mallya, wanted in India to face charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to around Rs 90 billion, can be regarded as a "fugitive from justice", the UK High Court has concluded.
Judge Andrew Henshaw, who upheld a worldwide freeze order and ruled in favour of 13 Indian state-owned banks to recover funds amounting to nearly 1.145 billion pounds in a judgment yesterday, took note of the fact that the 62-year-old businessman is contesting his extradition to India relating to "alleged financial misconduct".

"In all these circumstances, and even taking account of the fact that Dr Mallya is contesting the alleged grounds for extradition, there are grounds for regarding Dr Mallya as a fugitive from justice," the judge said as part of his ruling.
The High Court remained unconvinced by Mallya's claim that he has been a non-resident Indian (NRI) since 1988 and has lived in England since 1992, a country where he has indefinite leave to remain (ILR).
"The evidence indicates that prior to March 2016 Dr Mallya travelled fairly regularly between India and England for business and political reasons. Most of his business interests were in or closely connected with India, most notably United Breweries Group and Kingfisher AirlinesWhilst Dr Mallya has indefinite leave to stay in the UK, he is said to be a non-resident taxpayer," the court observed.
The judge also concluded that the businessman had been in "clear breach" of a Karnataka court's order when he disposed of assets like a historic sword of Tipu Sultan acquired at an auction in 2003.
"The sword of Tipu Sultan is an item of historic importance which Dr Mallya bought at an auction in 2003 for the equivalent of GBP 188,400 and states that he gave away in 2016 as his family members considered that it was bringing him bad luck," Judge Henshaw notes in his judgment.
"Dr Mallya declined to state in correspondence to whom the sword was given. Dr Mallya was unable to put forward any basis for contending that the disposal was not in breach of the Karnataka High Court's interim injunction, and accepted that it occurred after the Supreme Court had made clear that the injunction covered subsequently acquired assets It does, though, appear to me to have been in clear breach of the Karnataka court's order," he adds.
The judge, however, was less certain that luxury cars and yachts had been undeclared or disposed of by Mallya as claimed by the legal team representing the 13 Indian banks State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Corporation bank, Federal Bank Ltd, IDBI Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Jammu &a Kashmir Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, Punjab National Bank, State Bank of Mysore, UCO Bank, United Bank of India and JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt Ltd.
The judge noted: "The Claimants [Indian banks] say there are numerous other assets which have been linked to Dr Mallya in various sources on the internet, but which he denies that he owns. These comprise three yachts, numerous cars and the Mabula Game Reserve in South Africa.
"The registered/asserted owners are offshore companies and/or trusts. Since these matters are unverified, I do not consider I can take account of them."
Mallya's purchase of a Ferrari 246 GTS with an estimated value of 480,000 pounds was also questioned by the Indian banks. The UK court concluded that it may be the case that the payment of the deposit on the Ferrari was in breach of the Karnataka High Court's interim injunction.
"However, this point was not the subject of any detailed argument before me and, overall, I do not consider that the matters relating to the Ferrari carry matters any further on this application," the judge concluded.
The ruling by the UK court has been described as "significant" by TLT LLP, the UK law firm which represented the Indian banks in the case.
"This is a positive and big step forward. The judgement enables our client banks to proceed with enforcement of the Indian Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) ruling, which has now been registered and is immediately enforceable," said Paul Gair, partner in TLT's Banking & Financial Services litigation team.
"We are considering all of our options with our clients the worldwide freezing order has worldwide effect, so it's all of his assets wherever they may be. There are provisions for his weekly allowance, within which he can meet his needs," he added.
Mallya, who remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April last year, will return for the last leg of his ongoing extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London on July 11, after which the court is expected to set a timeline for judgment in that case.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), representing the Indian government, has claimed it has successfully established a prima facie case of fraud against the businessman.
Mallya has claimed the criminal charges against him are "without substance" and "politically motivated".

Vijay Mallya case: CBI gets boost on evidence admissibility

A UK court on Friday admitted the bulk of the evidence submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Vijay Mallya in connection with his ongoing extradition trial, giving a boost to India’s efforts to bring back the embattled liquor baron to face charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to around Rs 90 billion.
The 62-year-old flamboyant businessman, who appeared in the Westminister Magistrate’s Court here, had his £650,000 bail extended until the next date of hearing on July 11.

When the court reconvenes, oral submissions will be made on closing arguments to be submitted in writing to Judge Emma Arbuthnot over the next two months. The judge is then expected to indicate plans for a verdict in the case at the next hearing.
ALSO READ: Cabinet clears ordinance to crack down on Nirav Modi, Mallya-type fugitives
“We have just asked for a final hearing to make our closing submissions orally. Nothing wrong with that, no delaying tactics. On the contrary, we requested an earlier date than what was being discussed,” Mallya told reporters on being asked about “delays” in the case on his way out of the court.
During today’s hearing, the judge initially seemed reluctant to allow another hearing, being requested by Mallya’s defence team.
“So, you want a hearing for the press,” she said in response to Mallya’s counsel Ben Watson, pointing out the significant public and media interest in the case.
“That is extremely unfair,” responded Watson, adding that the defence team needed an opportunity to respond to some of the additional material presented by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), on behalf of the Indian government.

Finmin asks banks to collect passport details of big borrowers in 45 days

The Finance Ministry has directed state-owned banks to obtain passport details of all borrowers, who have taken loans in excess of Rs 50 crore, within 45 days with a view to preventing alleged fraudsters like Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya from fleeing the country, sources said.
In case the borrower does not have a passport, the bank should obtain a certificate in the form of declaration that the person does not have the passport, sources said quoting the Finance Ministry's advisory to banks.
It further said that the loan application form should be suitably modified to incorporate passport details of borrowers.
Passport details will help banks to take timely action and inform the relevant authorities to prevent fraudsters from fleeing the country, sources said.
In absence of passport details, banks were hamstrung in taking timely action to prevent defaulters especially wilful one from fleeing the country.
Several big defaulters like Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi, Vijay Mallya and Jatin Mehta have fled the country putting recovery mechanism in quandary.
Last week, the Cabinet approved the Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, though it was announced in the Budget for 2017-18, has been hastened after Nirav Modi and his uncle Mehul Choksi allegedly defrauded state-owned Punjab National Bank (PNB) of Rs 127 billion and left the country and are refusing to cooperate with law enforcement agencies.
The Bill provides for confiscating all assets of absconding fraudsters and loan defaulters to recover dues in a bid to tighten noose around fugitives like diamond merchant Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya.
The Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi also approved setting up of a National Financial Reporting Authority (NFRA) as an independent regulator for the auditors.
The proposed fugitive law aims to impound and sell assets of Nirav Modi-type escapees with a view to quickly recover dues.
It also will apply to defaulters who have an outstanding of Rs 100 crore or more and have escaped from the country.
As part of drive to clean the banking system, the Finance Ministry last week had directed public sector banks (PSBs) to probe all NPA accounts of over Rs 500 million for possible fraud and accordingly report the cases to CBI.
"PSB MDs directed to detect bank frauds & consequential wilful default in time & refer cases to CBI. To examine all NPA accounts > Rs 500 million for possible fraud," Financial Services Secretary had said in the tweet.
Besides, the ministry had asked banks to monitor loans above Rs 2.5 billion and red flags whenever the original covenants of the loans are violated. This was spelt out as part of 6-point-reform measures announced for PSBs in January.

Delhi court declares Mallya proclaimed offender in a FERA violation case

A Delhi court on Thursday declared beleaguered businessman Vijay Mallya a proclaimed offender for evading summons in a FERA violation case.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Deepak Shehrawat passed the order after noting that Mallya failed to appear before it despite repeated summonses.
"In view that Vijay Mallya failed to appear before this court within 30 days, and no representation was made on his behalf, he is declared as a proclaimed offender," the court said.
The court had on April 12 last year issued an open-ended non-bailable warrant against the liquor baron.
Unlike a non-bailable warrant, 'open-ended NBW' does not carry a time limit for execution.
On November 4, 2016, while issuing a non-bailable warrant against Mallya, the court had observed he had no inclination to return and had scant regard for the law of the land.
It had said that coercive process has to be initiated against Mallya as he was facing proceedings in several cases and avoiding an appearance in those matters.
The court had also held that Mallya's plea that he wanted to return to India but was "incapacitated" to travel as his passport had been revoked by Indian authorities, was "malafide" and "abuse of the process of law".
Mallya, who is reportedly in London, had submitted before the court on September 9 that was "incapacitated" to travel despite "best intentions" as his passport had been revoked.
On July 9, the court had cancelled the exemption from personal appearance granted to Mallya on an application of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and directed him to appear before it on September 9. The exemption was granted to Mallya in December 2000.
The anti-money laundering agency had issued summons to the businessman in connection with alleged payment of USD 200,000 to a British firm for displaying Kingfisher logo during the Formula One World Championships in London and some European countries in 1996, 1997 and 1998.
It had claimed that the money was allegedly paid without prior approval of the RBI in violation of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) norms.
In its plea against Mallya, the ED had also sought issuance of non-bailable warrant against the chairman of the now defunct Kingfisher Airlines to ensure his presence in the ongoing trial of the case, which is at the final stage.
According to ED, Mallya was summoned on four occasions for questioning in connection with a contract signed in December, 1995 with London-based firm Benetton Formula Ltd for promotion of the Kingfisher brand abroad.
When Mallya failed to appear before ED in response to the summons, a complaint was filed on March 8, 2000 before a court here and later charges were framed against him under FERA.