india

Updated: Jul 02, 2019 23:33 IST

Relieved at the England and Wales high court on Tuesday giving him permission to appeal against home secretary Sajid Javid’s extradition order, businessman Vijay Mallya said he felt vindicated at the ruling.

Justice Leggatt and Justice Popplewell ruled that Emma Arbuthnot of the Westminster Magistrates Court had erred in her December 2018 judgement by concluding that there is a prima facie case against him.

“I have always maintained that these are false charges, fabricated charges and have no merit. I think my point has now been vindicated,” he told journalists outside the court.

He added: “Two senior-most judges have given me permission to appeal…I wanted to win on the prima facie grounds because that is central to everything”.

Mallya reiterated his offer to banks to return the money he took as loans, and “leave me in peace. I have always offered to pay it all back, where is the question of fraud”.

He also had a word for the Indian government, urging it to review its policies on the aviation industry: “Now, the unthinkable has happened. Jet has collapsed. That reflects the fragile state of the aviation industry in India. The government needs to do something about that”.

“It is very unfair in India that if a business fails, the promoter is accused of fraud almost automatically. That is not right.”

He also took to Twitter to say that justice has prevailed.

God is great.Justice prevails. A Division Bench of the English High Court with two senior Judges allowed my application to appeal against the Magistrates Judgement on the prima facie case and charges by the CBI. I always said the charges were false. — Vijay Mallya (@TheVijayMallya) July 2, 2019

Facing charges of financial offences running into over Rs 9,000 crore, Mallya, who lost in the Westminster Magistrates Court after a year-long trial in December 2018, will now not be immediately extradited but will be able to mount further legal challenges in the high court.

Justice Leggatt and Justice Popplewell rejected four grounds put forth by Mallya’s defence team but upheld one that questioned the magistrates court’s findings on alleged misrepresentation by Mallya and his companies in securing loans from IDBI.