Liquor baron and UB Group chief Vijay Mallya has moved the Supreme Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against him by Enforcement Directorate.
NEW DELHI: Liquor baron and UB Group chief Vijay Mallya has moved the Supreme Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against him by Enforcement Directorate in a case pertaining to foreign exchange rules.
The matter is likely to come up for hearing on October 8.
Mallya has challenged the Delhi High Court judgement that turned down his plea seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in a trial court for alleged 'wilful' disobedience of summons issued by Enforcement Directorate over seven years ago.
The Directorate had alleged that Mallya violated FERA provisions while arranging funds for advertising his liquor products abroad a few years ago. It wanted to interrogate him in connection with a contract signed in December 1995 with a London-based firm Benetton Formula Ltd for promotion of his Kingfisher liquor brand abroad.
Mallya had allegedly paid 200,000 dollars to the British company for displaying his Kingfisher beer logo in Formula One World Championships to be held in London and some European countries in 1996, 1997 and 1998. The money was allegedly paid without prior approval from the RBI in violation of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA).
In his appeal before the apex court, Mallya stated the High Court failed to appreciate that the summons were not duly served as per the Foreign Exchange Rules 1974. The fourth summon was sent by SpeedPost which was not a prescribed mode of service of summons, he added.
The petition, filed through Vinita Bhargava, said the adjudicating officer of the ED in its order dated January 10, 2002 had fully exonerated both Mallaya and his company of any material breach of FERA provisions.
Upholding the trial court's order framing charge against Mallya for his non-appearance before ED, the High Court had rejected Mallya's plea observing that "no person, however high, mighty, wealthy and influential he might be, is above the law and can treat the judicial proceedings with contempt."
In September 1999, ED had summoned Mallya four times to interrogate him in connection with a FERA violation case.
According to ED, between September 15, 1999 and December 20, 1999 it had issued summons to Mallya on four occasions both at his residences in Delhi and Bangalore. However, he did not appear before ED on three occasions and also refused to accept the fourth summon.
On March 8, 2000, ED filed a complaint case before the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, accusing Mallya of disobeying its summons. Later in 2001, the trial court framed charges against Mallya for the offence.
For committing the offence of deliberate non-compliance of summons, an offender can get a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment under FERA.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}