Why was Mallya's appeal rejected?

BACKGROUND

Vijay Mallya has been accused of money laundering of Rs 9,000 crore & criminal conspiracy, resulting from the collapse of his defunct company Kingfisher Airlines, and then fleeing the country.

The Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate have been trying to extradite him from UK through a legal battle in UK.

India submitted an extradition request to the United Kingdom in February 2017 after Mallya made his self-imposed exile clear .Earlier, his appeal against a 2018 order to extradite him in India, has been rejected by a district court. 

‘Grounds for rejection’ 

The court UK High Court upheld the district court judgment. The task before the agency was to convince the courts that India has a "prima facie" case against Mallya based on which he should be extradited to face trial before Indian courts

It was observed by Lord Justice Stephen Irwin & Justice Elisabeth Laing in a 46 page judgment “We consider that while the scope of the prima facie case found by the Senior District Judge is in some respects wider than that alleged by the Respondent in India [CBI & ED], there is a prima facie case which, in seven important respects, coincides with the allegations in India.”

Finding merit in the case of conspiracy and fraud, made by Indian agencies, “The three loans were disbursed as the result of a conspiracy between the named conspirators. The loans were made despite Kingfisher Airlines’ weak financials, negative net worth and low credit rating. The loans were made despite the fact that KFA, as a new customer, did not meet the norms of IDBI’s Corporate Loans Policy,”

Mallya took the plea that the lower court was wrong to conclude that a prima facie case is made out which is not being prosecuted in India, that there’s an error in law in its approach to the prima facie case test, and also erred in its approach he admissibility of his evidence.

All these points have been rejected by the High Court.

The High Court also observed- “The appellant was party to false representations about inward investment, an exaggerated brand value, misleading growth forecasts, inconsistent business plans. The appellant’s dishonest intention not to repay loans is shown by his later conduct in trying to avoid personal and corporate guarantees."

This dismissal from the high court clears the decks for Mallya’s extradition to India, to face the charges in Indian courts, he has 14 days to apply for permission to appeal to the UK Supreme Court.

Justice Michael Briggs of the insolvency division of the high court granted relief to Mallya, ruling that he should be given time till his petitions to the Supreme Court of India and his settlement proposal before the Karnataka high court are determined, allowing him time to repay his debts to the banks in full.

The move  marks  a  win  for  CBI  and  ED,  which  had  been seeking  his  extradition  since 2018.

If he does not file an appeal, under the India-UK Extradition Treaty, it would be expected to formally certify the court order to be extradited to India within 28 days.