New Delhi, Sept. 6: The Supreme Court today declined to allow Essar Group vice-chairman and 2G case accused Ravi Ruia to travel abroad on the ground that he might never return.

The court declared itself "once bitten, twice shy", saying it had "cut a very sorry figure" after "somebody" who had been allowed to go abroad did not return. The judges did not name anyone.

Among the most high-profile persons who had stayed put abroad in the middle of raging controversies back home is industrialist Vijay Mallya. He has avoided returning to India to face a probe into alleged loan repayment default.

Justices J.S. Khehar and Arun Misra, who were on the bench, agreed with Anand Grover, special public prosecutor in the 2G case, that what is an offence in India may not be an offence abroad, making extradition difficult.

"We allowed somebody to go abroad and he decides not to come back," Justice Khehar observed. "See, we have cut a very sorry figure. See, he was a person as good as you are. Maybe he has more assets than you. But then you know what happened? We don't want to take a chance."

He added: "Once bitten, twice shy. Because we have passed an order, now this person says, 'Do what you want'."

Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi pleaded on Ruia's behalf that the industrialist, whose group's turnover last year was $27 billion, had to look after various business interests abroad and needed to travel overseas.

But the bench said that since the special court dealing with the 2G case was likely to pronounce its verdict shortly, allowing Ruia to travel abroad would not be proper. "There is now a judgment coming," Justice Khehar observed.

Singhvi argued that there could be no reason to impose a travel bar on someone who had travelled abroad 43 times since the trial began. He said his client needed to urgently visit several countries, including Russia, Canada and the US, where he has business operations.

"You have gone 43 times when the judgment was not being pronounced," Justice Khehar said.

Singhvi said: "I (Ruia) am an NRI. The (2G court) judge had always considered my NRI status and allowed me to go. There is not a single allegation of tampering, interfering with the witnesses, or violation of bail conditions."

Singhvi said Vikas Saraf, an Essar employee, "who is a prime accused... has been given permission to go abroad. I'm only a co-conspirator in the case."

He added that the pronouncement of the judgment would take a long time as the trial court was dealing with the main 2G case as well as other cases relating to offences such as money-laundering.

Singhvi told the court that Ruia owned an oil refinery in Britain, steel plants in Canada, a pellet plant in America and a large BPO company in Saudi Arabia. He said Essar ran India's second-largest refinery.

"When a man has established his impeccable track record, liberty is on a higher pedestal. Article 21 (Right to life and liberty) stands on a higher footing," he argued.

"My (Ruia's) brother, who is the head of the conglomerate, will stand surety for me. He is willing to go to jail if I don't' come back."

Justice Khehar shot back: "How can he (the elder brother) go to jail? It is a ridiculous suggestion."

Grover opposed Ruia's plea, saying the arguments were on the verge of completion and the judgment could be delivered after February next year.

He said Saraf had been granted permission to go abroad as he had genuine family reasons and had revealed his itinerary.

"But he (Ruia) plays ducks and drakes. Everybody else is giving a detailed itinerary (but) he says he doesn't want to give (his)... though you know where you are meeting, whom you are meeting," Grover said.

"How do we make sure (that) he will come back? Extradition is very difficult. Certain crimes that are offences here are not offences in several countries. If he decides to stay abroad, there is no way we can bring him back."

Singhvi claimed that Ruia had furnished his itinerary with all the details. But Justice Khehar went through the records placed by the CBI and said: "You have not filed. He (Grover) is right."

The bench dismissed Ruia's plea, refusing to interfere with a March 2016 order by the trial court refusing Ruia permission to travel abroad.

Several business leaders, politicians and others are accused in the scandal, which relates to alleged undercharging of mobile phone companies for spectrum allocation.