Supreme Court held that loan defaulters must be dealt with iron hands, it convicted absconder industrialist Vijay Mallya for contempt of court. A bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit held him guilty on two grounds and directed him to personally appear before it on July 10 when the court would decide quantum of punishment to be awarded to him.
The court passed the order on a contempt plea filed by a consortium of banks led by the SBI which sought action against Mallya for allegedly diverting $40 million to his children's accounts in foreign banks in violation of the court order.
The apex court had started proceeding against Mallya and had issued notice to him on March 8, 2016 on the plea by banks for recovery of about Rs 9,000 crore which Mallya and his companies owed to them. He, however, managed to flee the country days before SC took up the case against him.
Pleading the court to direct Mallya to bring back $40 million, which he received from Diageo, Attorney General had told the bench that Mallya had breached the SC order and his refusal to bring back the money had aggravated his breach and he should be directed to appear personally before the court.
"He has taken court for ride and we are taking action to bring him back. He has not made a honest disclosure regarding $40 million. We don't know how to get back the money but majesty of court is very important and he must abide by court's order, " Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi had said. The court, however, had raised question on how its order, if it was passed against Mallya, would be executed as he was living in the UK. It asked the Attorney General to provide modalities under which its order would be implemented.