The Supreme Court said on Thursday that it has been “dead-walled” about the proceedings in the United Kingdom involving fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya, who is behaving like a “free person” there while deferring its decision on how to punish him for contempt.
“We’ve been told there are some legal proceedings in the United Kingdom.” We have no knowledge of the specifics of those proceedings, such as their nature or the relief sought in those proceedings, or even their number… We’ve only been told that something is in the works. We don’t know when it will be resolved in the near future, or even which court it will be heard in… nothing. It’s like staring at a blank wall. So, how much longer can we go…” Justice U.U. Lalit, who presided over a three-judge panel, made the observation.
Mallya is repeatedly offending court
The court inquired as to what the maximum penalty under the Contempt of Courts Act could be imposed on Mallya. “As far as we know, the man is not in anyone’s custody in the United Kingdom.” He is a free individual. He is free to go wherever he wants. “The only thing we know from our foreign counterparts is that there is a procedure in place that may determine whether or not the person is to be extradited,” Justice Lalit said.
“It has already been established that there is contempt. We can now continue with the punishment… in fact, he was just in the news a few days ago. His London home was put up for auction. We can also see that he has reached an agreement with the bank. As a result, he is a very free person,” submitted senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, the court’s amicus curiae.
Mr. Mallya was aware of the sentencing hearing, according to Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, who is on the Bench with Justice P.S. Narasimha, because he had received both the contempt order and the order in his plea for review of the contempt action. Mr. Gupta believes that Mr. Mallya should not only be punished but that his assets should also be sequestered by the Supreme Court. Mr. Gupta stated, “The issuance of the warrant of arrest will not serve the purpose because we know he is in the United Kingdom and someone on his behalf is saying he cannot come to India.”
The court, according to the amicus, had given Mr. Mallya ample opportunity to present his defense through counsel. This has not been done by the businessman.
Mallya was found guilty of contempt by the Supreme Court in May 2017 for willfully disobeying the court’s order to come clean about his assets and not disclosing the $40 million he received from British liquor giant Diageo Plc after resigning as Chairman of United Spirits Limited in February 2016.
Mr. Mallya’s review petition against the 2017 contempt verdict was dismissed by the Supreme Court on August 30, 2020.
Mr. Mallya had told the court that he had no control over the $40 million because it had already been distributed among his three adult children, all of whom were citizens of the United States. A group of banks that Mallya owed money to file a contempt complaint against him, claiming that the $40 million was distributed among his three children in direct violation of a Karnataka High Court order that none of his assets be “alienated, disposed of, or subjected to the creation of third party rights.”
The Bench discussed the possibility of passing an order reversing transactions involving “public money” owed to the banks on Thursday.