The GoI submitted the evidence for a prima facie case of conspiracy to defraud, make a personal gain and money laundering against Vijay Mallya, now crowned the king of corruption. Through a fair trial a prima facie case on all three counts was established. On 10th December 2018 The Senior District Judge (The Chief Magistrate) Emma Arbuthnot (SDJ)at Westminster Crown Court sent Dr Vijay Mallya’s case to Sajid Javid, the UK Home Secretary for a decision on his extradition to India. A spokesman at The Home Office told the Sunday Guardian that the Home Office do not comment on cases of extradition, but the following statement was released ‘“On 3 February the Secretary of State, having carefully considered all relevant matters, signed the order for Vijay Mallya’s extradition to India. “Vijay Mallya is accused in India of conspiracy to defraud, making false representations and money laundering offences. Mr Mallya has 14 days from today to apply for leave to appeal.”’
Mallya was arrested in April 2017 and granted conditional bail; GoI presented additional charges and the case was recertified in September 2017 and a new arrest warrant issued a week later.
The evidence and submissions, including evidence from the ED and CBI, received by the Crown Court reads like a catalogue of loan defaults, financial obfuscation and misreporting, supplying false or misleading information/data/valuations, engine failures, and blaming the GoI for fuel prices. Mallya argued his prosecution was politically motivated, that for health reasons he should not be returned to a prison the GoI had refused to inspect, and that he would not receive a fair trial because of biased media reporting.
The Court heard in 2008 Kingfisher (KFA) was already broke despite substantial borrowings and uncompetitive in Aviation Industry. KFA arranged to borrow 2000 crore rupees for expenses, of which 1050 crores from a consortium led by the State Bank of India. In 2009 IDBI loaned further a 750 crores and UCO loaned 200 crores. In 2010 KFA were unable to repay the debts and all the Banks involved in the lending organised a consortium restructuring MDRA.
The Judgment records that Mallya and his co-conspiratorsboth at Kingfisher Airlines and IBDI, all named in the Judgment, went out of their way to frustrate recovery and avoid their responsibilities with the intention of not repaying the loans as agreed. The SDJ found that in 2009 Mallya and his senior executives were fully aware of the poor and deteriorating state of the business.
The Judgment which is articulated over 74 pages by SDJ Arbuthnot clearly details her methodical approach and conclusions about the misuse of loans to Kingfisher. An interesting note mentions that the IDBI may not have made sufficient effort to track the loans were being used as required.There is also a comment that the GoI evidence was messily presented with no pagination or index, this resulted in doubling the work for the Court.
Mallya’s defence also argued the prosecution was brought to assuage public anger at the debt incurred by state banks and questioned the integrity of the CBI, suggesting it was susceptible to political interference. The blame for the criminal circumstances was attributed to both the BJP/NDAand the Congress/UPA term and the defence alleged political point scoring. The SDJ confirmed the Supreme Court had cleared Mr Asthana of the CBI of allegations against his integrity, and refuted that the case for Mallya’s extradition was punitive because of his political beliefs.
Mallya’s defence was concerned for his health issues should he be extradited to Barrack No.12, Arthur Road, Mumbai. Mallya suffers from type 2 diabetes for which a specialiseddiet is essential, coronary heart disease and its possible consequences, asthma, sleep apnoea, osteoarthritis and a blocked salivary gland, all of which require specialist treatments that might not be available in prison. The Judge dismissed these concerns as weak and was confident the GoIwould not breach the assurances given by them for Dr Mallya’s conditions of fair imprisonment and wellbeing.
The SDJ found that Courts in India provide a competent and fair trial, that there was no international evidence to the contrary, concluding Mallya would receive a fair trial andwith a possible sentence of longer than 12 months.
PM Narendra Modi is getting tremendous credit for negotiating this extradition and this result will no doubt be helpful to the BJP in the May elections, but it is also a feather in the cap of British justice and decision making and UK’sHome Office/Sajid Javid deserve an honourable mention. UK’s bilateral relationship with India has been in the doldrums recently and perhaps this is a gateway to improving the post-Brexit partnership.