India asks UK to ensure early extradition of Mallya

May 4, 2017

New Delhi, May 4: India today asked the United Kingdom to ensure early extradition of fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya who is facing cases of bank loan default to the tune of Rs 9,000 crore by his now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines.

Union Home Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi raised the issue of early completion of the extradition process of Mallya, during his talks here with his UK counterpart Patsy Wilkinson, the second permanent secretary in the the British Home Office.

The issue of presence of certain Sikh militant elements in the UK, sharing of intelligence inputs on a real-time basis particularly with regard to the ISIS - both from ISIS-held territories, and modules being busted in the UK and Europe, were discussed at the two-hour-long meeting, official sources said.

Counter-terror cooperation between India and Britain besides a host of other issues figured in the parleys.

Matters relating to the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, strengthening of the intelligence-sharing mechanism and visa- related issues were also deliberated upon, the sources said.

61-year-old Mallya, who has been living in Britain since last year, was arrested by Scotland Yard last month on India's extradition request.

Within hours of his arrest, Mallya, who is accused of cheating and fraud, was released on bail by a London court.

The UK's Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will argue the case on behalf of the Indian authorities when it comes before the court.

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

India and the UK have an extradition treaty, signed in 1992, but so far only one extradition has taken place under the arrangement - that of Samirbhai Vinubhai Patel, who was sent back to India last October to face trial for his involvement in the post-Godhra riots of 2002.

However, unlike Mallya, Patel had submitted to the extradition order without legal challenge. India had given a formal extradition request for Mallya as per the extradition treaty between India and the UK through a note verbale, a diplomatic communication, on February 8.

The Union home secretary lauded the UK's effort to extradite Mallya and conveyed that New Delhi will help London to pursue the case in the UK court.

The sources said India told the UK delegation that if one-on-one contact can be established between the prosecuting agency in India and the Crown Prosecution or Department of Prosecution, then it would be faster and easier to put up evidence before the judge concerned.

India will inform the UK about the proceedings or hearings happening in the cases of wanted criminals by the UK in India and wants the UK to reciprocate in similar cases.

Both sides agreed that India and the UK will sign an MoU in July on reworking the agreement on security cooperation.

India also offered to drop cases registered against one Bangladeshi national, who is lodged in Assam, so that he can be extradited to the UK.

In return, sources said, India expects reciprocity that if people wanted by New Delhi are mired in any British case, those should be dropped and extradition facilitated.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

Comments