London

Alleged fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya has professed his innocence and claimed that he is legally prohibited from leaving the UK. In a series of posts on X, Mallya claims that the Indian Government has been grossly unjust to him. 

In October 2025, the MoS Finance Pankaj Chaudhary had told the Lok Sabha that a total of 15 individuals have been declared Fugitive Economic Offenders (FEOs) under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 (FEOA). The list included several high-profile names, such as Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi, among others, he said.

However, Malllya now claims that his continued stay in the UK is part of a legal bar on his travel to India.

"For all who say I am a bhagoda refusing to come to India, please be aware that I have been a permanent resident of the United Kingdom since 1992 and am currently legally prohibited from leaving this country. All this started with poster boy actions by the Government of India who have been grossly unjust in my case," he said in the post on X.

For all who say I am a bhagoda refusing to come to India, please be aware that I have been a permanent resident of the United Kingdom since 1992 and am currently legally prohibited from leaving this country. All this started with poster boy actions by the Government of India who…

— Vijay Mallya (@TheVijayMallya) September 8, 2026

In December last year, the Ministry of External affairs had said it remained fully committed that fugitives wanted in India return to the country and face trial before the courts. 

The Ministry said that several layers of legalities are involved, but the government remains committed to bringing the economic offenders back to the country.

"We remain fully committed that people who are fugitives and wanted by law in India, return to the country. For this particular return, we are in talks with several governments and processes are on... There are several layers of legalities involved but we remain committed to bring them back to the country so they can face trial before the courts here," MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal had said.

Meanwhile, in an earlier post on Tuesday, Mallya cited an excerpt of a reported affidavit which he claimed was filed in the Bombay HC by the Enforcement Directorate that cited recovery of Rs 14,131.60 cr from him.

"Affidavit filed by the ED in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Para 7 is the decreed debt and Para 17 shows recovered Rs 14,131.60 crore in 2021 !! 5 years on I am still referred to as a fraud who cheated the Banks," he said.

Mallya also posted a table giving what he claimed was a statement of account of recovery and alleged that he had been wrongly labelled a fugitive.

"To all who believe in fair and proper accounting justice please see the following table. Do I still deserve the way I am berated by the media and referred to as a fraudster at the very outset of a journalist’s script ? Why not start asking when I will get my refund," he said. 

"For all you naysayers, please independently verify and see that the ED released over Rs 350 crores to pay Kingfisher employees from my attached funds. I could not pay because ED attached my assets/funds," he added.

Earlier, in August Mallya had again claimed that banks have recovered dues from him but justice continued to be denied.

In a social media post on X, Mallya wrote, "...Banks and Government have admitted having recovered Rs 14,100 crores from me against a Judgement debt of Rs 6203 crores. Many more borrowers have settled at a fraction. Indian Debt Resolution Justice I presume. No media questions."

In February this year, the Bombay High Court had reprimanded Vijay Mallya, saying that he cannot seek equitable relief while deliberately avoiding court proceedings.

READ MORE:Mohsin is a volunteer at Ganeshotsav celebrations

The court gave Mallya a final chance to clarify if he intends to return to India. Mallya's petition challenges the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act and the declaration of his fugitiveness.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Chandrashekhar was hearing Vijay Mallya's petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act and the proceedings declaring him a fugitive. The bench stated that it was inclined to record that Mallya was evading the court's jurisdiction and therefore could not expect relief in his petition.