The Bombay High Court on Tuesday issued a warning to businessman Vijay Mallya against posting court documents on social media while his case was pending. According to reports from PTI, Justice Milind Jadhav was informed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) lawyer Ashish Mehta that Mallya shared the agency's affidavit in response to his petition before the HC on his social media accounts even before it was submitted to the court. The ED filed the affidavit on September 8 and served it to Mallya's legal team the same day, with the case scheduled to be heard on September 9. As per PTI, Mallya uploaded the affidavit on his social media accounts later on September 8, before the court had taken it up, prompting the court's stern warning. The HC on Tuesday adjourned the hearing to October 13 while directing the State Bank of India (SBI) to file its affidavit-in-reply. The court also directed SBI to file a fresh affidavit taking into account the disclosures made by the ED during the proceedings.
As reported by PTI, Mallya uploaded the affidavit on his social media accounts the same evening it was received by his legal team. Justice Jadhav expressed serious concerns about this conduct, stating it was not good practice and undermined the efficacy of the court. The judge told senior advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Mallya, to warn his client against such future actions, emphasizing that whatever he wants to submit should be done through proper court channels. Justice Jadhav told the court, "This is not good conduct. This is serious. Please warn him (Mallya) against doing so in future. Whatever he wants to submit he can do so in court," and added, "Please make your client understand, this is not the way to do it....it undermines the efficacy of the court." The court's warning came after the Enforcement Directorate told the court that Mallya had uploaded the agency's affidavit on his social media accounts even before it was formally submitted before the court. During the hearing, the Bombay High Court called for an end to the nearly decade-long dispute between Mallya and the banks over dues, with Justice Jadhav seeking an update from the ED on its probe and attached assets.
According to PTI, Mallya filed the petition in 2020 seeking a closure of the criminal cases registered against him, claiming that the dispute with the banks was settled after they recovered their dues. The ED affidavit revealed that movable and immovable properties worth ₹14,131.6 crore (as of August 2021) were handed over to the SBI-led consortium of lender banks. However, the central agency stated that mere recovery of assets did not absolve Mallya from money laundering charges against him who left India in March 2016. In its reply, the ED said the businessman continued to evade the process of law in India, and the central agency declared Mallya a proclaimed offender in November 2016. The HC on Tuesday adjourned the matter to October 13 while directing the State Bank of India (SBI) to file its affidavit-in-reply. The case also involves proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, with Mallya challenging the transfer of his attached assets to the lenders.
According to PTI, Mallya had told the High Court in February that he was not in a position to specify when he would return to India. He cited restrictions imposed by courts in England that he said prevented him from leaving the country. The High Court was hearing two petitions filed by Mallya. One petition challenges his designation as a "Fugitive Economic Offender" under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA), while the other contests a court order formally declaring him a fugitive. Senior advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Mallya, had referred to Supreme Court judgments where writ petitions were heard even in the absence of petitioners. He had submitted that extradition proceedings against Mallya are ongoing in the UK and that his client is aware of them but is unable to leave the English jurisdiction due to binding court orders. The High Court, however, questioned Mallya's intent to appear before the court, saying that he appeared to be relying on UK court orders without clarifying whether those orders had been challenged. The Bench indicated that such reliance could not be treated as a blanket justification.
As reported by PTI, Mallya is accused of money laundering and siphoning off at least ₹3,500 crore out of the total ₹9,000 crore of bank loans granted to his defunct Kingfisher Airlines. The ED attached his properties in 2016, and in 2019, a special court permitted SBI and other lenders to use these movable properties for debt recovery. The assets included United Breweries Holdings Ltd (UBHL) shares, which Mallya challenged before the High Court in 2020. The ED maintained in its affidavit that the recovery did not result in the cancellation or dropping of the money laundering charges against Mallya, emphasizing that asset recovery alone does not absolve him of the serious financial crimes he faces. The agency told the High Court that Mallya continued to evade the process of law in India and that the recovery of assets could not automatically result in the criminal proceedings being dropped. The Indian government has also been pursuing Mallya's extradition from the UK, where he has been living since leaving the country in 2016.
According to PTI, the HC on Tuesday adjourned the hearing to October 13 while directing the State Bank of India (SBI) to file its affidavit-in-reply. The court's decision came after the ED's strong opposition to Mallya's petition for case closure, with the central agency maintaining that asset recovery alone does not cancel money laundering charges. The Bombay High Court warned Mallya against sharing internal court filings and investigative affidavits on social media while his legal challenges remain pending before the bench. The next hearing is expected to consider the lender's response as Mallya's plea seeking closure of the criminal proceedings remains before the court. The Indian government has also been pursuing Mallya's extradition from the UK, where he has been living since leaving the country in 2016. The Bombay High Court told Mallya he would need to return to India and submit to its jurisdiction to pursue relief, with the former liquor baron's legal team having to address the ED's concerns about his conduct and the ongoing nature of the criminal proceedings. The court had directed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to file a response to Mallya's affidavit and also asked Desai to submit a detailed affidavit placing on record all statements made during the hearing so that the Union of India could respond accordingly.
