To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/The Bombay High Court on Thursday once again emphasised that it would not consider the petition filed by fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya challenging the provisions of the Fugitive Economic Offenders (FEO) Act until he returns to India.
Bench’s Order
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad said it is giving “one last chance” to the businessman to clarify whether or not he will return to India. “You (Mallya) have to come back…if you cannot come back then we cannot hear this plea,” HC told his counsel, senior advocate Amit Desai.
Mallya, who has been based in the UK since 2016, was declared a Fugitive Economic Offender in January 2019 by a special court hearing cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). He is facing several cases in India for alleged fraud and money laundering. He is accused of defaulting on multiple loan repayments and facing money laundering charges, left India in March 2016.
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has initiated extradition proceedings against him, which is at an advanced stage.
He has filed two petitions before the high court — one challenging an order declaring him as a fugitive economic offender and the other questioning the constitutional validity of the 2018 Act.
The bench said it was granting one more opportunity to Mallya to clarify if he was ready to return to India and kept the matter for hearing on February 18.
Emphasising that the businessman will have to return to India and face the judicial proceedings, the bench said: “We may have to record that you are avoiding the process of the court. You cannot take benefit of the proceedings. In all fairness to you, we are not dismissing the petition but giving you another opportunity.”
During a hearing in December 2025, the HC had clearly stated that it would hear the petition only if Mallya returns to India and had asked his counsel to clarify the same on an affidavit.
On Thursday, the bench said the businessman has to file an affidavit clearly stating whether he will return to India or not. “When will you come? You (Mallya) have already argued that you are entitled to a hearing without your physical presence in a court of law. But first file an affidavit clearly stating so,” the bench said.
Mallya’s counsel, Desai, submitted that there were judgments to show that such pleas can be heard and decided without the physical presence of the petitioner.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union of India, argued that Mallya has challenged provisions of the FEO Act after being declared a fugitive. “He (Mallya) can come to India first and then it can be seen whether he is liable or not liable to pay. He cannot not trust the law of the country,” Mehta said.
He submitted that the government of India is contesting the proceedings initiated by Mallya in London against extradition and the same was in its fag end. Realising that he would soon be extradited, Mallya has challenged the fugitive tag order here, Mehta added.
On Mehta’s argument that Mallya, in his affidavit, has said the banks were wrong to demand money from him, Desai replied that the businessman’s properties in India have been already attached by the enforcement agencies.
