Bombay High Court Tells Vijay Mallya to Return to India, Refuses to Hear Plea Until Then

The Bombay High Court has told fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya that it will not hear his petition challenging his fugitive status unless he returns to India to participate in legal proceedings.

A bench led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe (verify name before publishing if needed) observed that a person who is deliberately avoiding the jurisdiction of Indian courts cannot seek equitable relief while remaining outside the country. The court, however, stopped short of dismissing the petition and granted Mallya an opportunity to clarify whether he intends to return to India.

“You must come back. If you do not return, we cannot hear your petition,” the bench said, noting that the judicial process cannot be selectively engaged.

Challenge to Fugitive Economic Offenders Act

Mallya’s plea challenges the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA), as well as the proceedings that declared him a fugitive economic offender under the law.

The Act, enacted in 2018, allows authorities to confiscate properties of individuals who evade Indian courts by remaining abroad to avoid criminal prosecution in economic offence cases.

The High Court’s remarks indicate that it may not consider the merits of Mallya’s challenge unless he submits to the jurisdiction of Indian courts.

Government’s Position

Earlier, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) reiterated that the government remains committed to bringing back economic fugitives wanted in India.

MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said that while extradition and related legal processes involve multiple layers of judicial scrutiny, efforts are ongoing to ensure that individuals facing charges return to stand trial.

“We remain fully committed to ensuring that fugitives wanted by Indian law return to face proceedings before Indian courts,” he said, adding that legal complexities are being addressed through established mechanisms.

Background

Vijay Mallya left India in 2016 amid investigations into alleged financial irregularities involving loans taken by his now-defunct airline, Kingfisher Airlines. He has been contesting extradition proceedings in the United Kingdom.

The matter remains subject to ongoing legal proceedings in multiple jurisdictions.