Fugitive Indian businessman Vijay Mallya, currently facing extradition proceedings in the United Kingdom, has stirred controversy yet again. Speaking candidly on Raj Shamani’s popular podcast ‘Figuring Out’, Mallya criticized the Indian business environment, calling it deeply bureaucratic and politically influenced.
“There is no ease of doing business in India. It’s in the Indian DNA,” Mallya remarked during the interview. “No matter what a state or federal government may say, there are bureaucratic and political hurdles all along the way.”
Mallya, once hailed as the “King of Good Times,” fled India in 2016 after defaulting on bank loans worth over ₹9,000 crore. The Indian authorities later revoked his passport and began proceedings to extradite him. Though his legal fate remains undecided in the UK, Mallya’s recent comments have reignited debate around the ease—or lack thereof—of doing business in India.
— Vijay Mallya (@TheVijayMallya) June 5, 2025
“I Had to Be in the Good Books of 29 CMs”: Mallya on Liquor Business Challenges
While discussing his liquor business operations, Mallya highlighted the complex nature of regulatory compliance in India. He revealed that because liquor laws are governed at the state level, he had to maintain favorable relations with all 29 state chief ministers.
“Each state has its own laws for liquor,” he explained. “I had to be in the good books of 29 chief ministers. That in itself shows how fragmented and complicated doing business in India can be.”
Mallya went on to reveal how elections added another layer of pressure to businesses in the liquor industry. “Political parties often approached us for campaign funds, and many times these demands were unreasonable and impractical,” he said.
“I made it a point to leave the country during elections just to avoid being put in a situation where I would be accessible for these demands,” Mallya added.
Dodges Question on Bribery: “You Know India as Well as I Do”
When Raj Shamani asked Mallya about unofficial payments and bribery in the Indian system, the 68-year-old declined to provide a direct answer. “I’m not going to confirm or deny that,” he said diplomatically. “I think you know India as much as I know India.”
His evasive response, though subtle, implied the pervasiveness of corruption in India’s business landscape—without stating it outright.
Unfair Treatment Alleged: “My Freedom Ended When They Took My Passport”
Mallya also touched on his ongoing legal battle and departure from India. “My freedom ended the day they took my passport,” he said, describing how the Indian government revoked his travel documents amidst investigations into financial misconduct.
He defended himself by questioning the government’s claim of fraud. “If I defrauded the banks, then how did the government recover so much money?” he asked, referring to the recovery of more than double the ₹6,203 crore debt ruled by the debt tribunal.
Though he did not provide detailed evidence, Mallya insisted that much of the debt had already been recovered through the sale of his assets and corporate holdings.
Open to Return if Guaranteed a Fair Trial
When asked whether he would ever return to India, Mallya said he would consider coming back—but only if a fair trial is absolutely guaranteed.
“If I am assured absolutely [of a fair trial], I will think about it seriously,” he stated.
This conditional openness to return signals a possible shift in his stance but also underscores his deep mistrust of India’s judicial and political system.
Public Reactions and Broader Implications
Mallya’s remarks are likely to draw sharp criticism from Indian political and business circles. While some may view his statements as hypocritical, given his fugitive status, others might see his criticisms of red tape and political interference as reflective of broader challenges faced by entrepreneurs in India.
The timing of the interview is also notable, as India continues to promote itself on the global stage as a hub for startups and foreign investment under campaigns like ‘Make in India’ and ‘Ease of Doing Business’. Mallya’s comments, though controversial, could provoke policy-level introspection regarding state-wise licensing, election fund practices, and bureaucratic red tape.
