How CBI brought Mallya’s good times to an end
New Delhi, Dec 10: Reacting to the judgement of a UK court that ordered the extradition of Vijay Mallya, a CBI official said that they were confident this would be the order.
Ahead of the verdict, a joint team of Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate led by CBI joint director, Sai Manohar left for London. It may be recalled that it was the team that was led by Manohar which had played an active role in the extradition of AgustaWestland middleman, James Christian Michel as well.
The CBI spokesperson said that the agency hoped to bring him down soon and also wanted to conclude the case. We worked hard on this case. We are strong on laws and facts and were confident in pursuing the extradition process, the spokesperson also said.
Explaining the proceedings, the CBI official said that they had built a watertight case and it was on this basis that the order of extradition was passed.
During the probe, the agency had gathered enough evidence to show that Mallya allegedly diverted the loan funds from the purpose for which they were given. The agency in its FIR has alleged that the State Bank of India and its consortium banks had advanced various credit facilities to Kingfisher Airlines between 2005 and 2010, they said.
During 2009-10, the company failed to meet its repayment commitments to the bank from which it had availed the credit facilities and Kingfisher Airlines did not keep its account with the consortium banks regularly which became NPA, the FIR stated.
The consortium banks, therefore, recalled the credit facilities and also invoked corporate guarantee of UBHL and personal guarantee of Mallya. Further it was said that Mallya had deliberately not repaid the amount, outstanding dues payable by Kingfisher Airlines to the consortium of banks.
One of the main grounds that several persons place before the UK court while trying to avoid extradition are the jail conditions in India. During the hearing India was able to convince the court that the argument advanced by Mallya was false.
India however submitted video evidence of the jail conditions. It said that he would be lodged at the Arthur Road jail in Mumbai, if extradited. Further it was said that the flooring was new, walls were painted and the bathroom had been refurbished.
The refurbishing of the cell came in the wake of Mallya putting up a defence in the London court in which he had said that the extradition needs to be blocked as the conductions in the jails are bad. He said he was not returning to India due to poor jail conditions.