The Supreme Court on Monday sentenced fugitive industrialist Vijay Mallya to four months in jail with Rs 2,000 fine in a 2017 contempt case related to transfer of $40 million to his three children's accounts, despite a court's restraint order.
The top court also directed the Union Government to ensure the presence of Mallya, presently residing in the United Kingdom, for undergoing the punishment.
The money was part of $75 million settlement with Diageo Group when Mallya resigned from the chairmanship of United Breweries group in February 2016.
The court awarded the sentence to Mallya more than five years after holding him guilty of contempt of court on May 9, 2017, for not disclosing full particulars of assets and for violating Karnataka High Court's restraint orders in a case related to default in loan payment of over Rs 9,000 crore to consortium of banks led by SBI.
In its judgement, a bench of Justices U U Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and P S Narasimha said, "In order to maintain the majesty of law, we must impose adequate punishment upon the contemnor (Mallya) and must also pass necessary directions so that the advantages secured by the contemnor or anyone claiming under him are set at naught."
The court also noted that Mallya never showed any “remorse nor tendered any apology for his conduct".
The contempt provision carried maximum penalty of six months imprisonment.
The court also declared the transaction related to transfer of $40 million by Mallya to his children – Siddharth, Leanna and Tanya - is “void and inoperable”. It directed the industrialist and the beneficiaries to return the amount with 8 per cent interest per annum to the recovery officer within four weeks, failing which Mallya's properties will be attached.
"If the money is not deposited, the recovery officer shall take appropriate proceedings, including appointing forensic auditors, for recovery of the said amount and the Government of India and all the concerned agencies should assist and cooperate in the process,” the court said.
Mallya has been living in the United Kingdom where the court allowed India's plea for extradition. However, some proceedings over there had delayed the final process.
The bench had also noted that going by a normal logic, the contemnor has to be heard before pronouncement of sentence, but he has not appeared before the court.
Senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, who acted as amicus curiae, had submitted that the court has given several chances for Mallya to appear. Mallay's counsel had told the court he had nothing to say on merit of the matter.