The Bombay High Court refused to hear Vijay Mallya’s plea against the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, directing him to clarify his return to India before the court proceeds further.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday made it clear that it will not hear a petition filed by fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya unless he returns to India. A bench led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad said Mallya must first clarify whether he is willing to come back.
“You (Mallya) have to come back…if you cannot come back then we cannot hear this plea,” the High Court said.
Mallya, who has been living in the UK since 2016, has filed two petitions before the High Court. One challenges the order declaring him a fugitive economic offender, and the other questions the constitutional validity of the 2018 Fugitive Economic Offenders (FEO) Act.
The 70-year-old liquor baron faces several cases in India related to fraud and money laundering.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on February 18 and said it was giving Mallya another chance to clarify if he is ready to return.
“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,” the court said.
During the previous hearing in December 2025, the court had already said it would consider the petitions only if Mallya returned to India. On Thursday, the judges directed him to file an affidavit clearly stating whether he intends to come back.
“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,” Chief Justice Chandrashekhar said.
Senior advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Mallya, argued that there are court rulings which allow petitions to be heard even if the petitioner is not physically present.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, opposed this. He said Mallya challenged the provisions of the FEO Act only after being declared a fugitive under it.
“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.
Mehta also told the court that the Indian government is contesting Mallya’s extradition proceedings in London, which are at a final stage. He argued that since Mallya may soon be extradited, he has now challenged the fugitive declaration in India.
The solicitor general further said that in his affidavit, Mallya has claimed that banks were wrong to demand money from him.
Desai responded that Mallya’s properties in India have already been attached by enforcement agencies.
