The extradition of Vijay Mallya from the UK to India, a fugitive Indian businessman and former Member of Parliament, has been stalled by “secret” proceedings that have started in the UK, the central government told the Supreme Court on Monday, a fact suggesting that the former liquor baron may have applied for asylum in the UK.
Although the extradition proceedings against the liquor baron concluded in May after the UK High Court rejected Mallya’s request to go to the UK High Court against the proposed extradition to India, the new proceedings have delayed his departure to India, the high court was informed.
“Once the extradition process is finished, another secret process has begun, but we have not been notified and we are not part of the process. Extradition is not happening (due to the new procedures), ”lawyer Rajat Nair, representative of the central government, told a court headed by Judge UU Lalit.
Mallya flew to the UK in March 2016 as a consortium of Indian banks, which claims it owes them Rs 9 billion in principal and interest on loans made to its defunct Kingfisher Airlines, approached him to get the money back. He was later declared deliberate defaulter in India.
Read also | Bad Boy Billionaires: Sid Mallya says her father is a ‘political pawn who became an example of’
In London, speculation arose that the most likely issue in delaying Mallya’s extradition to India was an asylum application, which is a process that British authorities do not publicly comment on in individual cases as a matter of policy and strict data protection laws.
Mallya has lost a number of challenges to her extradition in Westminster Magistrates Court and High Court since proceedings began following her arrest in April 2017.
Under UK rules, until an asylum claim is determined, extradition cannot be carried out.
“It’s a safe asylum application,” said an individual associated with previous extraditions.
A spokesman for the Interior Ministry did not respond to HT’s inquiries on the matter.
A spokesman for the high commission had stated on June 5: “Vijay Mallya lost his appeal against extradition last month and was denied permission to appeal further to the UK Supreme Court.”
“However, there is an additional legal issue that must be resolved before the extradition of Mr. Mallya can be arranged. Under UK law, extradition cannot take place until it is resolved. The subject is confidential and we cannot go into details. We cannot estimate how long this issue will take to resolve. We are trying to fix this as quickly as possible. “
The UK head office has a backlog of over 100,000 asylum applications.
In the year ending June 2020, the UK provided protection, in the form of asylum, humanitarian protection, alternative forms of leave and resettlement, to 16,952 people, the latest official figures show.
Grant rates vary considerably by nationality, as protection requirements for specific nationalities or individuals vary, officials said, adding that of the nationalities commonly seeking asylum in the UK, Libyans (98%) and Syrians (96%) tend to have high grant rates. while citizens of India (3%), China (19%) and Bangladesh (16%) tend to have low subsidy rates.
On Monday, the Indian Supreme Court asked Mallya’s lawyer, Ankur Saigal, about the nature of the new proceedings cited by the Center, but the lawyer said he had not received instructions from his client on the matter. The court, which was also composed of Judge Ashok Bhushan, objected to Saigal’s response.
“As his advice, you must be fully aware. It cannot be said that she is not aware, ”the court commented and published the case for the next hearing on November 2.
The court also ordered Mallya’s lawyer to submit a concrete response on 2 November on the nature of the new proceedings in the UK, when those proceedings are likely to conclude and when Mallya will appear before the High Court.
Read also | CBI receives a letter rogatory to investigate the flow of funds in Vijay Mallya’s bank accounts
The court was hearing a contempt petition filed against Mallya by 14 banks, including the State Bank of India, for violating the April 2016 Supreme Court order asking the fugitive businessman to disclose details of all his properties and assets in India and abroad.
The contempt declaration itself stemmed from a case brought by the banks to the Debt Recovery Court in Bengaluru against Mallya seeking to recover more than Rs 6.3 billion that Mallya companies owed them in 2016.
The banks had also prayed that Mallya’s passport would be frozen and arrested.
The DRT did not hear that prayer from the banks, prompting them to approach the Karnataka high court, seeking proper instructions to the court for the swift removal of the request submitted by the banks.
The Karnataka High Court in March 2016 denied the request, prompting the banks to refer the Supreme Court, which in April 2016 asked Mallya for details about her assets.
The banks approached the high court in July 2016 claiming that Mallya made no such disclosure. The sentence in that contempt case that found Mallya guilty was pronounced only on May 9, 2017, nearly 10 months after the guilty plea was entered.
.
