Vanuatu revokes Lalit Modi's passport as India FEMA proceedings continue

What the Record Shows

The Prime Minister of Vanuatu, Jotham Napat, directed the country's Citizenship Commission on 10 March 2025 to revoke the passport issued to the former Indian Premier League chairman Lalit Kumar Modi, stating that citizenship of the country "is a privilege, not a right". The direction, announced by Vanuatu's government, followed disclosures that Modi had acquired Vanuatu nationality. It is an act of a foreign government concerning its own citizenship grant, not a finding by any Indian authority.

Around the same time, India's Ministry of External Affairs confirmed that Modi had applied at the Indian High Commission in London to surrender his Indian passport. The ministry's spokesperson said the request "will be reviewed as per existing rules and procedures" and that India "will continue legal proceedings against him as required by law". Modi left India in 2010 and has been resident in London since.

The Indian proceedings in the public record are civil in nature. They arise from the Directorate of Enforcement's adjudication under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, which deals with contraventions and monetary penalties rather than criminal conviction. Modi has never been convicted of any offence, is not among the individuals the government has declared Fugitive Economic Offenders, and has consistently denied wrongdoing.

A pending investigation or adjudication contains allegations, not findings of guilt; the person named is presumed innocent until proven otherwise, and due process continues.

How It Worked

The matter that is documented in court records is the FEMA adjudication. The Bombay High Court, in an order dated 5 September 2019 in FEMA Appeal No. 10 of 2019, recorded that the Directorate of Enforcement was pursuing proceedings against Modi that had passed through an adjudication order of 31 May 2018 and an Appellate Tribunal order of 17 May 2019 in Appeal No. EE-61/MUM/2018. In that order the High Court declined the Directorate's civil applications seeking, among other things, a stay of the tribunal's order, noting that the tribunal appeals were themselves set down for final hearing. The dispute at that stage was procedural, over which forum would decide the FEMA questions and in what order.

The FEMA process is an established civil mechanism. An adjudicating authority examines whether the foreign-exchange law was contravened and may impose penalties; the person concerned can appeal to the Appellate Tribunal and then to the High Court. That is the track on which Modi's FEMA matter has run, with orders and appeals moving between the adjudicating authority, the tribunal and the Bombay High Court since at least 2018. An earlier matter, Lalit Kumar Modi vs Union of India, reached the Delhi High Court in 2014 while he was the suspended IPL chairman.

Beyond the FEMA adjudication, the Ministry of External Affairs' statement referred to Modi facing allegations connected to his tenure at the IPL. Those characterisations are allegations that have not been tested to a conviction, and this report does not treat them as established. What can be stated on the record is narrow and precise: a foreign government revoked a passport it had granted, India is processing his surrender of an Indian passport, and FEMA adjudication proceedings have been under way through the tribunals and courts.

Because Modi has remained outside India, the Indian proceedings have advanced without his personal appearance, and no extradition has been secured. That absence is the practical fact that has kept the matters unresolved for well over a decade.

Who Lost Money

The verified public record does not quantify a proven loss attributable to Modi. The FEMA proceedings concern alleged contraventions of the foreign-exchange law and the penalties that may follow from them, not a computed loss to identified individuals. Any figure attached to the IPL-era allegations is, on the record, an allegation rather than an adjudicated sum.

No individual investors or depositors are named as victims in the FEMA matter. The interest asserted in these proceedings is that of the exchequer and the regulator of foreign-exchange transactions, and the question they pose is whether the law was contravened, not whether a particular person suffered a quantified loss.

With the FEMA appeals still working through the tribunal and the courts, and with no criminal conviction, there is no confiscation or recovery outcome on the public record to report. The honest position is that the sums involved have not been judicially fixed.

Where It Stands Now

As of today, Modi is not a declared Fugitive Economic Offender, has no conviction against him, and remains resident in London. The Vanuatu passport revocation of March 2025 is an act of that country's government; it does not by itself alter his status under Indian law. His application to surrender his Indian passport was, per the Ministry of External Affairs, to be considered under the ordinary rules, and India said it would continue its legal proceedings.

The FEMA adjudication and appeals remain the substantive Indian proceedings. They are civil in character, and their outcome is a matter for the adjudicating authority, the Appellate Tribunal and the High Court, not for prediction here. No provisional attachment, arrest or conviction is recorded against Modi in the verified public record reviewed for this report.

A pending investigation or adjudication contains allegations, not findings of guilt; the person named is presumed innocent until proven otherwise, and due process continues. That principle applies with particular force where, as here, there is no conviction and the person has publicly contested the claims.

What It Means

The Modi matter is a study in the limits of enforcement across borders. The Fugitive Economic Offenders Act and the extradition process both depend on either the person's presence or the cooperation of another state. Where a person has left India, contests the proceedings, and later acquires citizenship of a third country, the gap between an allegation and an enforceable outcome can persist for years, and a foreign government's decision on its own passport does not close that gap.

For readers, the useful distinction is between the kinds of proceeding involved. A FEMA adjudication is a civil penalty process; a criminal conviction requires a trial and proof beyond reasonable doubt; a declaration as a fugitive offender requires a court's satisfaction on specific conditions. None of these is the same as the others, and a headline about a passport should not be read as any of them. The enforcement archive at /news?cat=enforcement tracks how these categories differ in practice, and the cross-border pattern is visible in the Nehal Modi extradition matter and in agency actions such as the ED searches on the Surana Group.

FAQ

Does this mean Lalit Modi is guilty of anything?

No. He has not been convicted of any offence. The Indian proceedings in the record are civil FEMA adjudication matters, which concern alleged contraventions and penalties, not guilt. He is presumed innocent, has publicly denied wrongdoing, and due process continues.

What did Vanuatu actually do?

Vanuatu's Prime Minister directed the Citizenship Commission on 10 March 2025 to revoke the passport the country had issued to Modi, saying citizenship there is a privilege rather than a right. It is a decision by a foreign government about its own nationality grant, not an Indian legal finding.

Has India secured his extradition or declared him a fugitive offender?

No. India has not secured his extradition, and he is not among the individuals the government has declared Fugitive Economic Offenders. The Ministry of External Affairs said India would continue its legal proceedings and would consider his request to surrender his Indian passport under existing rules.

What are the FEMA proceedings about?

They are civil proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, in which an adjudicating authority examines alleged foreign-exchange contraventions and may impose penalties. Modi's matter has moved through the adjudicating authority, the Appellate Tribunal and the Bombay High Court, as the 2019 order records.

Have any victims or losses been established?

No proven loss attributable to Modi appears in the verified public record. The FEMA proceedings concern contraventions of the foreign-exchange law rather than a computed loss to named individuals, and no figure has been judicially fixed.

Where can I read the official record?

The Bombay High Court's order of 5 September 2019 in FEMA Appeal No. 10 of 2019 is available on Indian Kanoon, and the Vanuatu passport development was reported by India's official broadcaster, News on Air.

This report is based on the order of the Bombay High Court dated 5 September 2019 in FEMA Appeal No. 10 of 2019 and the Ministry of External Affairs confirmation reported by News on Air on 10 March 2025, reviewed on 3 August 2026.