MUMBAI: Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya has told the Bombay High Court that he is unable to specify when he can return to India, citing legal restrictions imposed on him in the United Kingdom and the revocation of his Indian passport.
The submission was made through his senior counsel during the hearing of petitions challenging his designation as a fugitive economic offender and the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. A Division Bench led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice M S Karnik was hearing the matter.
Earlier, the High Court had made it clear that it would first require clarity on Mallya’s willingness to return to India before proceeding with the challenge. The Bench had asked whether he intended to come back and, if so, when. In response, Mallya filed an affidavit stating that he is currently not in a position to provide any timeline.
According to the affidavit, courts in the United Kingdom have imposed conditions that prevent him from leaving that country. He has also pointed out that his Indian passport was revoked in 2016, which further restricts his ability to travel internationally. Given these constraints, he said he cannot indicate when he would be able to return to India.
Mallya’s counsel argued that the High Court should not insist on his physical return as a precondition for hearing the constitutional challenge. It was submitted that access to justice and the right to challenge legislation should not be denied merely because the petitioner is outside India. The defence contended that there is no legal requirement mandating his presence in the country for the court to examine the validity of the law.
The Union government, however, has opposed the plea, maintaining that Mallya has been declared a fugitive economic offender after due process. He was declared as such in 2019 in connection with alleged financial irregularities and loan defaults involving public sector banks.
Mallya has been residing in the United Kingdom since 2016 and faces extradition proceedings initiated by Indian authorities. His legal battle spans multiple forums, including courts in India and the UK.
The High Court has sought the Centre’s response to the latest affidavit and is expected to consider whether to proceed with the matter despite his absence. The case raises broader questions about the rights of individuals declared fugitive economic offenders and whether such designation can limit their ability to pursue constitutional remedies before Indian courts.
