Vijay Mallya arrest, extradition: He tweets it's 'usual Indian media hype'

After reports on Tuesday suggested that businessman Vijay Mallya had been arrested in London by Scotland Yard, the industrialist rubbished the news saying only the extradition hearing had started, as scheduled, and the Indian media was hyping the news. 

"Usual Indian media hype. (The) extradition hearing in Court started today as expected," Mallya said in a tweet. 

A few weeks before, UK set in motion the process of extradition of the industrialist who has been declared a proclaimed offender.

Mallya fled to UK in March 2016 after being pursued in courts by banks seeking to recover about Rs 9,000 crore owed by his Kingfisher Airline. 

Last month, the British government certified India's request and sent it to a district judge for further action.

Earlier on Tuesday, CNBC-TV18 reported that Mallya had been produced in a local court in the UK and would soon be handed over to India. Meanwhile, Times Now reported that Mallya had been granted conditional bail in the case. 

Mallya has avoided several summon notices from Indian courts.  

Despite multiple injunctions, he has failed to appear before investigators at the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Earlier in January this year, a CBI court had issued a non-bailable warrant against Mallya in the Rs 720-crore IDBI Bank loan default case.

Mallya, whose now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines owes more than Rs 9,000 crore to various banks, had fled India on March 2, 2016.

No high-profile extradition has taken place from the UK to India since a treaty was signed in 1993, though India has extradited a number of Britons, including Maninderpal Singh, convicted of raping and murdering a British teenager, who had fled to India.

In the UK, extradition involves several steps, most of which are time-barred but allow several tiers of appeal. Once the Secretary of State has certified that the matter can go to court, and if the court is satisfied that enough information has been supplied, an arrest warrant can be issued. This is the point at which Mallya’s case rests currently.

The court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the conduct described in the request is an extradition offence (which includes the requirement for dual criminality). Generally the information accompanying a request needs to include: details of the person; details of the offence of which they are accused or convicted; if the person is accused of an offence: A warrant for their arrest or provisional arrest (or an authenticated copy); if someone is unlawfully at large after conviction of an offence: A certificate of the conviction and sentence (or an authenticated copy), or for provisional arrest, details of the conviction; evidence or information that justifies the issue of a warrant for arrest in the UK, within the jurisdiction of a judge of the court that would hold the extradition hearing.

Extradition can be reviewed by the Secretary of State under specific circumstances:

* The person could face death penalty (unless the Secretary of State gets adequate written assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or, if imposed, will not be carried out)

* There are no speciality arrangements with the requesting country — ‘speciality’ requires that the person must be dealt with in the requesting state only for the offences for which they have been extradited (except in certain limited circumstances)

* The person has already been extradited to the UK from a third state or transferred from the International Criminal Court and consent for onward extradition is required from that third state or that Court (unless the Secretary of State has received consent)

None of these apply to Mallya.

The Secretary of State has to make a decision within two months of the day the case is sent. Unless there is an appeal, an individual must be extradited within 28 days of the Secretary of State’s order.