Explosive Allegation: Vijay Mallya Blames Government Interference for Kingfisher Collapse

Vijay Mallya Slams Government Interference in Kingfisher Airlines Collapse

Controversial businessman Vijay Mallya has launched a scathing attack on the Indian government, accusing it of direct government interference in the operations of his now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines. In a rare and candid interview, Mallya declared that the biggest challenge of doing business in India is not competition or capital — but the government itself.

‘I Was Told Not to Downsize’ – Mallya Claims Political Pressure

Reflecting on the early days of Kingfisher Airlines’ troubles, Mallya claimed that he approached then Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee to propose downsizing the airline, citing unsustainable operations. However, he was allegedly told not to downsize and was assured that banks would support him regardless of the losses.

This moment, he claims, marked the beginning of a downward spiral. The airline was unable to restructure or recover as per market logic — and the forced expansion, he suggests, was due to government interference rather than business misjudgment.

Indian Bureaucracy Criticized for Blocking Settlement Efforts

During the same interview, Mallya revealed that between 2012 and 2015, he made four separate settlement offers to Indian banks to resolve the Kingfisher Airlines debt. Each of these offers, he claims, was either ignored or rejected, despite providing personal guarantees and offering to repay large portions of the loans.

Mallya emphasized that while international courts have judged him harshly, he feels political and bureaucratic hostility in India kept him from finding a fair resolution. He expressed frustration over the Indian media’s portrayal of him, labeling him a “fugitive” and “fraudster,” despite offering what he believes were legitimate repayment plans.

Government Recovery vs. Public Narrative

In a surprising twist, Mallya cited an official Indian Ministry of Finance report acknowledging the recovery of ₹14,100 crore through asset sales and recoveries related to his companies — an amount more than double the ₹6,203 crore originally adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT).

“If I had duped the banks, how did the government recover so much more than the declared debt?” he asked. He believes this disparity in numbers points to a manipulated narrative and further confirms government interference in his legal and financial battles.

Kingfisher Airlines: From National Pride to Symbol of Collapse

Kingfisher Airlines was once seen as a symbol of luxury and ambition in Indian aviation. Mallya said it was “a class apart,” but poor regulatory support, heavy taxation on aviation fuel, and an unsupportive business environment crippled the airline’s financial health.

Adding insult to injury, he claims, was the media’s relentless portrayal of him as a criminal — including fabricated stories of lavish spending and foreign property acquisitions. “Everything I did was with my own money,” he insisted, denying that public funds were misused.

Calls for Fair Trial and Return to India

Mallya stated he would be willing to return to India if assured of a fair trial, suggesting he had always been open to facing the legal process — but fears political targeting. “If I’m assured justice, I’ll come back,” he said, emphasizing that his silence over the years was strategic, not an admission of guilt.

A Deeply Divided Legacy

Despite the allegations and court cases, Mallya insists that his business contributions, from building globally recognized liquor brands to entering Formula One with Force India, should not be forgotten. Yet, he believes that government interference, fueled by media-driven public outrage, has unfairly destroyed his legacy.

Conclusion: A Businessman or a Political Scapegoat?

Vijay Mallya’s explosive comments put a renewed spotlight on the role of government interference in India’s corporate failures. While legal proceedings continue, his side of the story challenges the narrative of simple financial fraud — instead, painting a more complex picture of business, politics, and public perception.