In court, Mallya questions impartiality of Indian judicial system

In the Vijay Mallya extradition trial, the defence has questioned the impartiality of the Indian judicial system.

The 61-year-old was back in the dock at Westminster Magistrates' Court in London for day four of the hearing when his barrister, Clare Montgomery, deposed Dr Martin Lau to give his views on the evidence presented by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Indian Supreme Court rulings.

"I hold the Supreme Court in the highest respect but it is equally not disrespectful to indicate that some doubts are voiced about particular patterns [in judgments]," Dr Lau, an expert on South Asian law, told court.

Quoting an unnamed study by three academics from Singapore and Hong Kong, Lau raised questions on the neutrality of Supreme Court judges close to retirement. Lau was also made to comment upon some of the evidence produced by the CBI to back up its case against the liquor baron in an attempt to discredit its admissibility in court. Reading from Lau's written testimony, Mallya's counsel quoted from an unnamed media report to claim that there had been "coercion" by Special Director Rakesh Asthana and his team over the banks in India to pursue criminal proceedings against her client.

OneIndia News