Moneycontrol News
A UK court on December 10 ruled that there is a strong enough for a decision to be taken by the Home Secretary of State on whether to order Vijay Mallya’s extradition.
Here are some of the key points from the judgement made by Judge Emma Arbuthnot:
>> The Court, on analysing the evidence provided, concluded that there is sufficient evidence for a prima facie case against the former liquor baron for fraud, making false representations to make gains for himself and money laundering.
>>On a review of the evidence and a hearing of the arguments provided, the Court also found that there is a prima facie case that the funds availed by the now defunct Kingfisher Airlines were misused.
>> On the analysis and teh conclusion in relation to a conspiracy involving some at IDBI Bank, one of Mallya’s lenders, the Judge noted that on the one hand, “There is no doubt as can be seen from the chronology set out above that there has been a catalogue of failures of the bank at different levels. The failings were before the loans were sanctioned and afterwards. On the other hand, there is not a great deal of evidence from which I could draw inferences that various bank executives were involved in a fraud to defraud their own bank and that when they sanctioned the loans they intended KFA not to repay the loans as agreed and required.”
“It is either a case that the various continuing failures were by design and with a motive (possibly financial) which is not clear from the evidence that has been put in front of me, or it is a case of a bank who were in the thrall of this glamorous, flashy, famous, bejewelled, bodyguarded, ostensibly billionaire playboy who charmed and cajoled these bankers into losing their common sense and persuading them to put their own rules and regulations to one side.” And noted that the Bank had not followed its own procedures while handing out credit,” the Judge added.
>> On the arguments by Mallya and his representatives that the Arthur Road prison conditions did not have sufficient facilities to accomodate his health conditions, the Judge concluded from the video evidence provided that the prison’s conditions were adequate and that private healthcare arrangements can be made by Mallya.
>> On the criticism made that considerable media attention which would mean a prosecution of Dr Mallya, the court found insufficient evidence to find that he will not be tried by a competent and fair court in India.
“Courts are used to dealing with high profile cases which are accompanied by often ill-advised political commentary.”
Further, “There was no evidence which allowed me to find that if extradited Dr Mallya was at real risk of suffering a flagrant denial of justice.”
>> On the argument that the courts would biased against Mallya over political pressures, the Judge concluded, “I do not accept that the courts in India are there to do what the politicians tell them to do. As I have already said, the court will be under great scrutiny. I do not find any international consensus which would enable me to find that the judges in India are corrupt. The most the Professor could do was give me a handful of individual examples where the process appeared to be defective in one way or another. Such defective processes came to light and were corrected by the senior courts.”
>> The court also rejected any allegations of abuse of process over a lack of evidence.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
