 "Courts issue NBWs against Mallya, say he has no regard for law")
In a double whammy, two non- bailable warrants (NBW) were issued on Friday against beleaguered businessman Vijay Mallya in separate criminal cases by two courts here, both of which observed that he neither had any regard for law, nor any intention to return to India.
One of the courts also said coercive steps could be taken against Mallya straight away as there was "no discernible inclination" on his part to submit to the jurisdiction of the court.
While one court issued arrest warrant against the liqour baron in a case of allegedly evading summons in a FERA violation matter registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the other judge issued NBW in a 2012 cheque bounce case lodged by the Delhi International Airport Ltd (DIAL).
"Keeping in view the conduct of the accused (Mallya) as demonstrated by previous orders and the present observation, it appears that the accused has no regard to the law of the land and has no intention to return.
"In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that coercive steps need to be taken against the accused. Issue NBW against the accused," CMM Dass said.
The court listed the matter for December 22 and directed the ED to execute the warrant.
In the cheque bounce case, Metropolitan Magistrate Sumeet Anand also issued a fresh NBW against Mallya as the earlier warrant could not be executed. The court directed Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of External Affairs to execute it.
The trial court had summoned Mallya as accused following a complaint by DIAL, which operates the capital's IGI Airport, claiming that a cheque of Rs one crore issued by Kingfisher Airlines (KFA) on February 22, 2012 was returned to them a month later containing the remarks - "fund insufficient".
DIAL had filed four cases in June 2012 against Mallya over KFA's cheques totalling Rs 7.5 crore not being honoured. The grounded airline had issued the cheques towards payment for services availed by them at the IGI airport here.
While hearing the ED's case, the CMM said that on October four it had specifically noted that he could approach Indian authorities and obtain emergency travel document to return to the country by approaching the High Commission in London. He was also asked to take necessary action to comply with court's earlier directions to appear before it.
"Despite having the option, the accused has failed to
take any action to obtain the emergency travel documents to travel to India. It reflects upon his bonafide and it appears that he has no intention whatsoever at all to come to India to submit to the jurisdiction of the court," the court said.
Regarding the submission by senior advocate Ramesh Gupta and advocate Ajay Bhargava, appearing for Mallya, that first bailable warrant be issued and then the extreme step of NBW be taken, the court said it was not a case where the accused appearing diligently or absenting once or twice. There was no discernible inclination on his part to appear.
It is pertinent to mention that ED's counsel N K Matta had earlier sought issuance of NBW against the Chairman of the defunct Kingfisher Airlines to secure his presence in the ongoing trial of the case, which is at the final stage.
On July 9, the court had cancelled the exemption from personal appearance granted to Mallya and directed him to appear before it on September 9. The exemption from personal appearance to Mallya was granted in December 2000 on ED's complaint for evading summons issued by it.
The agency had issued summons to the businessman in connection with alleged payment of USD 200,000 to a British firm for displaying Kingfisher logo in 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 from RBI in violation of FERA norms.
Mallya, who is reportedly in London, had submitted before the court on September 9 that he wanted to return to India but was "incapacitated" to travel despite "best intentions" as his passport had been revoked. He had left the country in March.
To this, the ED, on October 4, had told the court that Mallya had no intention to return to India and his passport was revoked due to his own conduct.
Matta had earlier argued that the court should recall its December 2000 exemption order, as a PMLA court in Mumbai has recently issued an open-ended warrant against him in connection with a money laundering case.
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.
Mallya is facing action after defaulting on over Rs 9,000 crore loan from 17 banks, besides several cheque bounce cases.
In July this year, he had skipped appearance before a PMLA court in Mumbai in connection with a money laundering probe against him in alleged bank loan fraud case.
One of the courts also said coercive steps could be taken against Mallya straight away as there was "no discernible inclination" on his part to submit to the jurisdiction of the court.
While one court issued arrest warrant against the liqour baron in a case of allegedly evading summons in a FERA violation matter registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the other judge issued NBW in a 2012 cheque bounce case lodged by the Delhi International Airport Ltd (DIAL).
Also Read
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Sumit Dass, who was hearing the ED case, said Mallya's plea that he was handicapped for want of passport and could not travel to India, "clearly and unequivocally" showed that it was "laced with malafide and an abuse of process of law".
"Keeping in view the conduct of the accused (Mallya) as demonstrated by previous orders and the present observation, it appears that the accused has no regard to the law of the land and has no intention to return.
"In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that coercive steps need to be taken against the accused. Issue NBW against the accused," CMM Dass said.
The court listed the matter for December 22 and directed the ED to execute the warrant.
In the cheque bounce case, Metropolitan Magistrate Sumeet Anand also issued a fresh NBW against Mallya as the earlier warrant could not be executed. The court directed Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of External Affairs to execute it.
The trial court had summoned Mallya as accused following a complaint by DIAL, which operates the capital's IGI Airport, claiming that a cheque of Rs one crore issued by Kingfisher Airlines (KFA) on February 22, 2012 was returned to them a month later containing the remarks - "fund insufficient".
DIAL had filed four cases in June 2012 against Mallya over KFA's cheques totalling Rs 7.5 crore not being honoured. The grounded airline had issued the cheques towards payment for services availed by them at the IGI airport here.
While hearing the ED's case, the CMM said that on October four it had specifically noted that he could approach Indian authorities and obtain emergency travel document to return to the country by approaching the High Commission in London. He was also asked to take necessary action to comply with court's earlier directions to appear before it.
"Despite having the option, the accused has failed to
take any action to obtain the emergency travel documents to travel to India. It reflects upon his bonafide and it appears that he has no intention whatsoever at all to come to India to submit to the jurisdiction of the court," the court said.
Regarding the submission by senior advocate Ramesh Gupta and advocate Ajay Bhargava, appearing for Mallya, that first bailable warrant be issued and then the extreme step of NBW be taken, the court said it was not a case where the accused appearing diligently or absenting once or twice. There was no discernible inclination on his part to appear.
It is pertinent to mention that ED's counsel N K Matta had earlier sought issuance of NBW against the Chairman of the defunct Kingfisher Airlines to secure his presence in the ongoing trial of the case, which is at the final stage.
On July 9, the court had cancelled the exemption from personal appearance granted to Mallya and directed him to appear before it on September 9. The exemption from personal appearance to Mallya was granted in December 2000 on ED's complaint for evading summons issued by it.
The agency had issued summons to the businessman in connection with alleged payment of USD 200,000 to a British firm for displaying Kingfisher logo in 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 from RBI in violation of FERA norms.
Mallya, who is reportedly in London, had submitted before the court on September 9 that he wanted to return to India but was "incapacitated" to travel despite "best intentions" as his passport had been revoked. He had left the country in March.
To this, the ED, on October 4, had told the court that Mallya had no intention to return to India and his passport was revoked due to his own conduct.
Matta had earlier argued that the court should recall its December 2000 exemption order, as a PMLA court in Mumbai has recently issued an open-ended warrant against him in connection with a money laundering case.
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.
Mallya is facing action after defaulting on over Rs 9,000 crore loan from 17 banks, besides several cheque bounce cases.
In July this year, he had skipped appearance before a PMLA court in Mumbai in connection with a money laundering probe against him in alleged bank loan fraud case.