Vijay Aggarwal, the Indian criminal lawyer known for representing high-profile clients including fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi, is now facing a criminal case in the United Kingdom. Aggarwal was arrested in London on August 11 and has since been charged with four counts of sexual assault involving two women.

According to reports citing the Metropolitan Police and court proceedings, three of the charges relate to an alleged incident on August 9, while another concerns an alleged incident on May 26. The charges have been brought under Section 3 of the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003, which covers intentional sexual touching without consent.

Aggarwal was reportedly arrested at a Mayfair property at 29 Brick Street, where he had been staying. His personal assistant, Manpreet Kaur, was also arrested and has separately been charged with two counts of intentionally encouraging or assisting the commission of sexual assault.

The case first came before Westminster Magistrates’ Court, where Aggarwal and Kaur were reportedly remanded in custody. Their next hearing is scheduled before Southwark Crown Court on September 10.

The allegations against Aggarwal have not been tested at trial, and the charges do not amount to a finding of guilt. The two women involved have not been publicly identified.

The arrest has also generated a second, separate set of reports concerning Aggarwal’s immigration status and alleged cash recovery at the same Mayfair property. Those claims, which emerged around the reported detention, have been disputed by people close to Aggarwal and have not been independently established in the public record.

They form a separate strand of the London story – one that has added further questions around what was happening at the property before Aggarwal’s criminal case came to light.

What The Police Allegedly Say Happened

The sexual-assault case centres on two women and a series of allegations said to have taken place at the Mayfair property.

According to reports based on the charges, Aggarwal is accused of sexually assaulting one woman on August 9. Three of the four charges against him relate to that alleged incident. A separate charge concerns an alleged sexual assault involving another woman on May 26.

The precise circumstances surrounding the alleged incidents will ultimately have to be tested through the UK court process. At this stage, what is publicly available comes from the charges and reporting around the police investigation rather than a judicial finding that the offences occurred.

The case also involves Aggarwal’s personal assistant, Manpreet Kaur. She has been charged with two counts of intentionally encouraging or assisting the commission of sexual assault. Reports have linked those allegations to claims that women were brought into contact with Aggarwal after responding to what was described as a job advertisement.

According to the prosecution case reported by British and Indian media, the women were allegedly invited to the Mayfair property. The advertisements are said to have offered employment, although investigators reportedly came to believe that the recruitment process was connected to the alleged offences.

Two other people were also reportedly arrested as part of the investigation. A 23-year-old man and a 43-year-old woman were subsequently released on bail while enquiries continued.

The two women who reported the alleged assaults have not been publicly identified. Reports say they are being supported by specialist officers.

For now, the central question is not whether Aggarwal is guilty. That will be determined, if the case proceeds to trial, through the British justice system. What can be established at this stage is that the allegations have resulted in formal charges, a court appearance and continued criminal proceedings against a lawyer who has spent much of his career defending people accused of serious offences.

The Mayfair Townhouse

At the centre of the London case is a property on Brick Street in Mayfair. Reports identify the address as 29 Brick Street, a luxury serviced townhouse where Aggarwal was staying when the police investigation unfolded.

The property is not incidental to the story. It is the location repeatedly mentioned in reporting about the sexual-assault allegations, the arrests and the separate claims concerning immigration and cash.

Reports have described the building as a four-storey, five-bedroom serviced townhouse in one of London’s most expensive neighbourhoods. Some accounts have put its rental cost at roughly £2,000 a night, although the precise arrangements under which Aggarwal was staying there have not been publicly established.

Aggarwal’s personal assistant, Manpreet Kaur, was reportedly at the property when police arrived and was arrested alongside him. The subsequent charges against her form part of the same criminal investigation.

The property has also featured in a different set of reports that emerged around Aggarwal’s detention. Those reports alleged that British immigration officials had examined his activities in the UK and that cash was found during an inspection of the Mayfair address.

However, people close to Aggarwal have reportedly rejected attempts to link the alleged cash recovery to his detention, while the precise amount, ownership and source of any cash reportedly found have not been independently established in the public record.

This leaves the Mayfair property at the intersection of several strands of the story. One concerns formal sexual-assault charges now before the British courts. Another concerns immigration and alleged cash recovery, claims that have been reported but remain contested.

What happened inside the townhouse, and what British authorities ultimately establish about the various allegations surrounding it, will therefore be important to understanding the full London episode.

Then Came The Immigration Allegations

Before the details of the sexual-assault charges emerged, another version of the London story was already circulating.

Reports claimed that Aggarwal had been detained by British immigration authorities for several days over possible violations of UK immigration rules. The allegations centred on whether he was authorised to undertake professional work while in Britain and whether his activities there complied with the conditions attached to his immigration status.

According to those reports, the matter came to the attention of British authorities after a complaint was allegedly made by the landlord of the Mayfair property in May. Immigration officials were then said to have examined Aggarwal’s activities in the country.

Some accounts further claimed that several junior lawyers were present at the property when officials carried out an inspection. The reports suggested that Aggarwal may have been conducting legal or professional work from the address despite allegedly not having the necessary permission to do so in the UK.

Those are significant claims. But they need to be separated from what has actually been confirmed publicly.

At the time of reporting, no publicly available document from the UK Home Office, Border Force, Metropolitan Police or a British court had been identified that independently confirmed the immigration allegations or established that Aggarwal had been detained specifically for violating immigration rules.

The distinction matters because the word “detained” can describe a number of different stages or circumstances in British law enforcement, while an immigration violation and a criminal charge are not interchangeable.

The subsequent emergence of the sexual-assault case has further complicated the original account of why Aggarwal came to the attention of British authorities.

For now, the immigration story remains a reported strand of the wider London episode rather than a conclusion established by a British court. And alongside it sits another allegation that attracted considerable attention – the reported discovery of a large amount of cash at the same Mayfair property.

And Then There Was The Cash

The cash allegation is the part of the London story that has generated perhaps the most speculation – and also the strongest pushback from people close to Aggarwal.

Reports claimed that a substantial amount of cash was found during an inspection of the Mayfair property. The exact figure has varied across accounts, while details concerning who the money belonged to and where it came from have not been independently established.

Some reports attempted to connect the alleged cash recovery with the wider questions surrounding Aggarwal’s activities in Britain. That led to suggestions about the purpose of the money and whether it had any connection to his professional work or his clients.

Those suggestions, however, remain allegations.

The situation became more complicated after Aggarwal’s family members and friends challenged reports linking his reported detention to the alleged cash recovery. In comments reported by ANI, people close to the lawyer disputed the way the events had been presented and objected to the suggestion that the cash allegation explained his detention.

That distinction is important. A report that cash was allegedly found is one thing. Establishing its ownership, source, purpose or connection to any offence is another.

There is also, at present, no publicly available British court finding establishing that the reported cash was connected to criminal activity. Nor has the precise amount, ownership or provenance of the alleged cash been established through a public judicial record.

The cash story therefore sits in an uncomfortable middle ground. It has been reported, it has been disputed, and it remains part of the broader questions surrounding the Mayfair property. But it cannot, at this stage, be presented as an established criminal allegation against Aggarwal.

Who Is Vijay Aggarwal?

Long before his name appeared in reports from London, Vijay Aggarwal had built a career in India’s criminal courts representing people whose cases routinely attracted public attention.

Aggarwal is a Delhi-based criminal lawyer and has appeared in several high-profile matters involving allegations ranging from financial fraud and money laundering to serious criminal offences. His work has repeatedly placed him alongside defendants and investigations that have made national headlines.

• Among the most prominent names associated with his legal career is fugitive businessman Mehul Choksi. Aggarwal has represented Choksi in proceedings in India and abroad, including matters before the Bombay High Court and proceedings following Choksi’s arrest in Belgium in 2025.

That association has made Aggarwal a familiar figure in one of India’s biggest financial-crime stories. Choksi, along with his nephew Nirav Modi, has been accused by Indian authorities of involvement in the Punjab National Bank fraud case, involving allegations of fraudulent guarantees and transactions worth roughly $1.8 billion. Both have denied the allegations.

But Choksi is only part of Aggarwal’s professional profile.

His career has involved defending clients in cases where the difference between an accusation and a conviction can determine the entire course of a person’s life. That is the traditional role of criminal defence counsel: to challenge the prosecution’s case, question evidence and represent the accused through the legal process.

It is also why the London case has attracted particular attention.

Aggarwal has spent years appearing in courtrooms on behalf of people facing serious allegations. He is now himself facing four criminal charges in a British court.

To understand why his name carries weight in India, however, it is necessary to look more closely at the client who has arguably defined the most prominent chapter of his career: Mehul Choksi.

The Mehul Choksi Connection

If there is one relationship that has made Vijay Aggarwal particularly recognisable outside the criminal-law profession, it is his association with Mehul Choksi.

Aggarwal has represented Choksi in multiple legal proceedings as Indian authorities have pursued the businessman over his alleged role in the Punjab National Bank fraud case. Court records have identified Aggarwal as Choksi’s counsel in proceedings before the Bombay High Court.

The relationship became even more prominent after Choksi was arrested in Belgium in April 2025 following India’s efforts to secure his extradition. Aggarwal represented him during the legal battle that followed, appearing publicly as one of the lawyers defending Choksi’s position.

For Aggarwal, the Choksi brief was not a routine criminal case. It placed him at the centre of a long-running international legal battle involving India, Belgium, extradition proceedings and allegations connected to one of India’s largest banking scandals.

Choksi is accused by Indian investigative agencies of being involved in the alleged fraud at Punjab National Bank, alongside his nephew Nirav Modi. Indian authorities have alleged that fraudulent letters of undertaking and related banking transactions caused losses running into approximately $1.8 billion.

Choksi has denied the allegations and has fought India’s attempts to bring him back to face proceedings. His legal team has repeatedly challenged the Indian authorities’ case and the circumstances surrounding the allegations against him.

Aggarwal has consequently spent years dealing with a case that extends well beyond a conventional courtroom dispute. His work for Choksi has involved questions of extradition, jurisdiction, criminal allegations and the treatment of an accused person across different legal systems.

That connection also explains why Aggarwal’s name appeared so quickly in Indian reporting when news of his London arrest emerged.

But the Choksi brief is significant for another reason. It places Aggarwal within a much larger network of India’s high-profile financial-crime litigation — one that includes another name inseparable from the PNB scandal: Nirav Modi.

From Choksi To The PNB Scandal

The Mehul Choksi case cannot really be separated from the larger Punjab National Bank scandal.

Choksi and his nephew Nirav Modi became two of the most prominent names in a case that exposed alleged weaknesses in the bank’s systems and triggered one of India’s biggest financial-crime investigations. Indian authorities have alleged that fraudulent Letters of Undertaking and related transactions were used to obtain credit from overseas branches of Indian banks, ultimately resulting in losses estimated at around $1.8 billion.

Both men absconded India before the full scale of the allegations became public and have since fought separate legal battles from abroad.

For Aggarwal, representing Choksi meant operating within that larger legal battle. His work involved not only the allegations originating in India but also the international proceedings that followed Choksi’s departure.

The case became particularly significant when Choksi was detained in Belgium in April 2025 after Indian authorities renewed efforts to secure his extradition. Aggarwal was among the lawyers representing him in the proceedings that followed.

Aggarwal’s association with the PNB case therefore put him in a very particular position within India’s legal world. He was not merely representing a businessman accused of financial wrongdoing; he was defending one of the central figures in a case that had become a symbol of India’s wider battle against high-value economic offences and fugitives.

And while Choksi became his most recognisable client, Aggarwal’s career was not built around one case alone.

Over the years, his work has taken him through a broader range of criminal matters, including cases involving serious allegations and defendants whose names have frequently appeared in the national press.

One of those cases would later become relevant to Aggarwal’s own public record — not because he was accused of the offence, but because of how a complainant described his conduct while he was representing another man accused of rape.

The 2021 Rape Case

One earlier case involving Vijay Aggarwal is worth examining because it has sometimes been confused with the allegations he now faces in London.

In 2021, Aggarwal was part of the defence team representing journalist Varun Hiremath, who had been accused of raping a 22-year-old woman in Delhi. An FIR was registered against Hiremath under Sections 376, 342 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code.

The case became contentious during the bail proceedings. The complainant subsequently wrote to the Chief Justice of India alleging that she had been humiliated during the court proceedings and specifically raised objections to the conduct of members of the defence team, including Aggarwal

Hiremath’s initial anticipatory-bail application was rejected by a Delhi court in March 2021. His defence team then approached the Delhi High Court, where Aggarwal was among the lawyers representing him.

The bail proceedings, however, were not a final determination of whether the rape allegation itself was true or false.

Importantly, we have not found a final trial judgment establishing either Hiremath’s conviction or acquittal in the underlying rape case.

What the case does establish in relation to Aggarwal is narrower: he was a defence lawyer in a high-profile rape case, and the complainant publicly complained about the conduct of the defence team during the proceedings.

The Other Cases That Made His Name

Mehul Choksi may be the client most closely associated with Vijay Aggarwal today, but his professional record stretches across some of India’s biggest criminal and financial cases.

• One of the most significant was the 2G spectrum case, where Aggarwal represented several accused, including Shahid Usman Balwa, Vinod Goenka, R.K. Chandolia and others. The case, which became one of India’s biggest corruption scandals, ended in a major victory for the defence when the Special CBI Court acquitted all the accused in December 2017, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case. Aggarwal subsequently argued that the prosecution had failed to establish the allegations against his clients.

• His work has also included the Uphaar cinema case, one of Delhi’s most closely followed criminal cases. Aggarwal represented Gopal Ansal in proceedings arising from the 1997 Uphaar cinema fire and subsequent allegations concerning the destruction and tampering of evidence. The case has continued through multiple rounds of litigation over the years.

• He later appeared in some of India’s major financial-crime investigations as well. Aggarwal represented Rana Kapoor, the former Yes Bank chief, in proceedings involving allegations of money laundering and financial irregularities. Kapoor was granted bail in one of the Enforcement Directorate’s cases in 2022, although other proceedings against him continued.

• Aggarwal also represented businessman Ratul Puri in the AgustaWestland-related money-laundering case. Puri was accused by investigators of involvement in the alleged laundering of proceeds connected to the controversial helicopter deal. He denied the allegations and was granted bail in 2019. Aggarwal has continued to appear for Puri in subsequent legal proceedings.

• His client list has also included Chanda Kochhar, the former ICICI Bank chief executive, in connection with the Enforcement Directorate’s investigation into the ICICI Bank-Videocon matter.

Then there is Nirav Modi.

Court records have identified Aggarwal as Modi’s counsel in proceedings connected to the businessman, placing the lawyer on the legal side of both major accused figures in the PNB scandal. Modi, like Choksi, has denied the allegations against him and has fought India’s attempts to bring him back to face proceedings.

Taken together, the cases paint a clearer picture of Aggarwal’s professional career than any single client can.

He has represented businessmen accused of financial crimes, people prosecuted in major corruption investigations, defendants in cases involving mass-casualty events and individuals pursued by Indian investigative agencies in high-value economic-offence cases.

The common thread is not that his clients were guilty or innocent. It is that Aggarwal repeatedly appeared on the defence side of cases where the allegations were serious, the defendants were prominent and the legal battles attracted considerable public attention.

That history also provides the context for the latest case.

For much of his career, Aggarwal’s name appeared in the news because someone else was facing the allegations. In London, the legal position has changed. This time, the charges are against him.

Did Vijay Aggarwal Face Similar Allegations Before?

The question naturally arises now that Aggarwal is facing four sexual-assault charges in London: has anything similar been alleged against him before?

Based on the available reporting and court records reviewed for this story, there is no credible, independently verified record we have found of a previous sexual-assault, rape or similar sexual-misconduct allegation against Aggarwal himself.

That does not mean there have been no controversies involving his work. His career as a criminal defence lawyer has repeatedly placed him in cases involving allegations of serious offences, including sexual crimes. But representing an accused person is not evidence that the lawyer shares responsibility for the alleged offence.

The 2021 Varun Hiremath case is a useful example. Aggarwal was part of Hiremath’s defence team, and the complainant objected to aspects of the defence’s conduct during the proceedings. 

There are also other references online that can appear relevant when searching Aggarwal’s name alongside sexual-offence cases. Some involve people with similar names or cases in which Aggarwal appeared as a lawyer.

In other words, the publicly available record does not currently support describing Aggarwal as someone with a history of sexual-assault allegations.

The London case therefore represents a significant departure from the controversies and criminal cases associated with his professional career. For the first time in the reporting reviewed for this story, the allegations of sexual offending are directed at Aggarwal himself, rather than at someone he is representing.

That distinction will remain important as the British proceedings move forward.

For now, the London charges are allegations. There has been no conviction, and the outcome of the case will ultimately depend on the evidence presented before the British courts.

Still, what can be said with greater certainty is that a prominent Indian criminal lawyer is facing a formal criminal case in Britain, while a separate set of reports about his activities and the Mayfair property continues to circulate alongside it.

The British courts will now determine what happens to the charges that have actually been brought before them.

The Last Bit, What Happens Next

The immediate next step in the London case is the British court process.

Aggarwal and Manpreet Kaur are due to appear before Southwark Crown Court on September 10, where the case is expected to move into the next stage of preparation. The allegations against both will have to be tested through the British criminal justice system.

For Aggarwal, that means the four sexual-assault charges remain allegations unless and until a court determines otherwise. The same applies to the allegations against Kaur concerning her alleged role in encouraging or assisting the offences.

The prosecution will have to establish its case against them, while the defence will have the opportunity to challenge the evidence and present its own case.

The two women involved in the allegations have not been publicly identified, and the precise evidence that prosecutors intend to rely upon has not been fully disclosed in public reporting.

There is also the unresolved question of the separate immigration and cash reports.

At present, those allegations sit outside the formal sexual-assault charges that have been reported against Aggarwal. Whether British authorities have taken, or will take, separate action over his immigration status or any alleged cash recovery remains unclear from the publicly available information.

That leaves several questions still unanswered.

Why was Aggarwal in Britain? What was the precise nature of his professional activities there? What happened at the Mayfair property? What, if anything, was found there? And how much of the early reporting about immigration and cash ultimately forms part of any official investigation?