The Supreme Court had ordered Mallya and the beneficiaries of the aforementioned $40 million transactions to deposit the amount they received with interest at 8 percent per annum with the said debt collector within four weeks of sentencing them to four months in jail. in prison for contempt of court on July 11.
The court had further asked the Center to ensure the presence of the wanted businessman, who has been in the UK since 2016, so that he can be taken into custody.
On September 5, a bench comprising Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat will consider the supplementary proceedings petition filed by a group of banks led by State Bank of India.
“It is further alleged that the letter dated 18th August, 2022 received from the Recovery Officer-2, DRT-2, Bengaluru stating that till date no amount has been received by the Recovery Officer from the Contemnor (Mallya) nor the beneficiaries,” the Supreme the office report of the case uploaded to the court’s website states.
On September 5, the Supreme Court will probably also take into account the Ministry of the Interior’s letters about the new development of the case.
The judges had previously found that Mallya, 66, had not repented of his actions or attempted to apologise, and that an adequate punishment had to be imposed to preserve the authority of the law.
On May 9, 2017, the Supreme Court found Mallya guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children against court orders. A fine of Rs 2,000 was also imposed for it.
It had stated that if the requested amount is not deposited, the concerned recovery officer has the right to initiate necessary legal action to recover the funds with the full support and cooperation of the Government of India and all relevant agencies.
“It is possible to take such appropriate steps, including the appointment of a forensic auditor,” the court said.
It had said that Mallya would get an extension of two months if the $2,000 fine was not paid within the deadline.
The court ruled that the transactions cited in the May 9, 2017 judgment and decision, which led to the $40 million payout to the beneficiaries, are “incorrect and unworkable.”
The court cited the Supreme Court’s May 9, 2017 verdict, which found Mallya had violated the “text and substance” of the orders passed by the Karnataka High Court by paying $40 million and was guilty of contempt.