Please banks, take your money, says Vijay Mallya

LONDON: liquor mogul Vijay Mallya Once again, he asked the Indian banks to recover 100 percent of the principal amount owed to them at the end of their three-day appeal by the British Supreme Court on Thursday against an order to India.

The former head of Kingfisher Airlines, 64, wanted in India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to an estimated 9 billion rupees on unpaid bank loans, said the Directorate of Execution (ED) and the Central Office Research () are fighting over the same assets and not treating it reasonably in the process.

I ask the banks with their hands crossed, recover 100 percent of their capital immediately, said outside the royal Courts of Justice in London .

“The Execution Directorate attached the assets to the banks' complaint that I was not paying them. I have not committed any crime under the Money Laundering Prevention Act (PMLA) that the Enforcement Directorate must suo moto attach my assets, he said.

I'm saying, please, banks take their money. The ED is saying no, we have a claim on these assets. So, ED on the one hand and banks on the other are fighting for the same assets, he added.

When asked about returning to India, he said: “I should be where my family is, where my interests are.

If the CBI and ED are going to be reasonable, it is a different story. What they have been doing to me for the past four years is totally irrational.

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bank that presided over the appeal, concluded by listening to the arguments in the case and said they will deliver their verdict at a later date after considering oral and written submissions in the Case very dense in the upcoming weeks.

On a day of heated discussions between Mallya's lawyer, Clare Montgomery, and Crown Prosecutor Service (CPS) attorney Mark Summers, arguing on behalf of the Indian government, both sides clashed over the prima facie case of fraud and cheating against Mallya.

“We maintain that he lied to get the loans, then he did something with the money he did not owe and then refused to return the money. All this could be perceived by a jury as a clearly dishonest behavior, ”said Summers.

What they [Kingfisher Airlines] were saying [to the banks] about profitability in the future was deliberately incorrect, he said, while addressing the High Court to counter Mallya's claims that the Judge of the Court of Westminster magistrates, Emma Arbuthnot, had made a mistake. when he found a case to answer in Indian courts against Mallya.

Mallya, who is released on bail for an extradition order, is not required to attend the hearings, but has been in court to observe the proceedings since the three-day appeal was opened on Tuesday. A key defense to refute a prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation on the other hand has revolved around the fact that Kingfisher Airlines was a victim of economic misfortune along with other Indian airlines.

However, the CPS has argued that there is enough in the 32,000 pages of general evidence to meet the obligations of the [extradition] treaty that there is a case to respond. Not only is it a prima facie case, but overwhelming evidence of dishonesty ... and given the volume and depth of the evidence that the district judge [Arbuthnot] had before her, the trial is thorough and detailed with the stranger error, but nothing that affects the prima facie case, Summers said.

At the beginning of the appeal, Mallya's lawyer claimed that Arbuthnot did not examine all the evidence because if he had done so, he would not have fallen into the multiple errors that permeate his trial. The Superior Court must establish whether the magistrates' court did not comply with a point of law in its verdict in favor of extradition.

Representatives from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as well as the Indian High Commission in London have been present in court to take notes during the course of the appeal hearing.

Mallya had received permission to appeal against his extradition order signed by the former secretary of the Interior of the United Kingdom, Sajid Javid, last February for only one reason, which challenges the prima facie case of the Indian government against him of fraudulent intentions to acquire loans Banking

At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London in December 2018, Judge Arbuthnot had found “clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds” and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS on behalf of the Indian government.

Mallya has been released on bail since his arrest for an extradition order in April 2017 that involves bail worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his trip while challenging that decision.