The Bombay High Court has made it clear that fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya cannot contest his “Fugitive Economic Offender” (FEO) status while remaining abroad. The court on Thursday said it will not hear his plea unless he returns to India.
Mallya, who has been living in the United Kingdom since 2016 and is fighting extradition, has challenged both the order declaring him a fugitive economic offender and the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018.
Court Insists on Physical Return
As reported by PTI, a bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad directed Mallya to clarify whether he is willing to come back to India.
“You have to come back. If you cannot come back, then we cannot hear this plea,” the bench observed.
The court scheduled the next hearing for February 18 and granted Mallya another opportunity to clearly state his position. It warned that it may have to record that he is avoiding the judicial process if he fails to respond decisively.
“In all fairness, we are not dismissing the petition but giving you another opportunity,” the court said.
Affidavit Demanded
The High Court had earlier taken a similar stand in December 2025, stating that it would consider Mallya’s plea only if he returned to India. Reiterating that view, the bench asked him to file an affidavit clarifying his intent.
Chief Justice Chandrashekhar questioned the delay, asking, “When will you come?” and noted that although Mallya has argued he is entitled to a hearing without being physically present, he must first formally state his position on record.
Senior advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Mallya, argued that legal precedents allow courts to hear such pleas even without the petitioner’s physical presence.
Centre Opposes the Plea
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly opposed Mallya’s petitions. He argued that the businessman challenged the provisions of the FEO Act only after being declared a fugitive economic offender.
“He can come to India first and then it can be seen whether he is liable or not liable to pay. He cannot distrust the law of the country,” Mehta told the court.
Mehta also pointed out that extradition proceedings in London are nearing completion. According to him, Mallya may have moved the Indian court anticipating a possible extradition order.
The Centre further argued that Mallya’s affidavit claims banks were wrong in demanding repayment, despite his default on multiple loans.
Background of the Case
Mallya was declared a Fugitive Economic Offender in January 2019 by a special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). His properties in India have since been attached by enforcement agencies.
The 70-year-old former liquor baron left India in March 2016 after defaulting on large-scale bank loans. He continues to face fraud and money laundering charges in multiple cases.
With the High Court drawing a firm line, Mallya now faces a critical choice: return to India and contest the charges in person, or risk having his petitions remain unheard.
