The court upheld the attachment of properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, affirming the reasonable belief standard for provisional orders despite challenges relating to evidence.

Headnote:(A) The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 5(1), 8(1), and 2(1)(u) - Provisional Attachment Order confirmed - Appellants challenge the legality of the attachment of properties allegedly linked to proceeds of crime - The court affirmed the attachment finding sufficient reason to believe by the Joint Director. (Paras 16-26)

(B) Legal Standards for Attachment - The standard for confirming a provisional attachment requires a reasonable belief based on sufficient material, not complete evidence. (Paras 18-19)

Facts of the case:
The Appellants filed appeals against the Provisional Attachment Order confirming the attachment of several properties based on allegations of extortion and money laundering. Evidence included testimonies implicating them in serious criminal activities, and discrepancies in their income sources compared to property acquisitions.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Appellants failed to provide satisfactory evidence regarding the sources of funds for the acquired properties, affirming the connection to proceeds of crime.

Issues: Whether there was reasonable cause to confirm the Provisional Attachment Order and the lawful basis for the Respondent's actions under the PMLA.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the burden of proof does not require complete evidence at the provisional order stage but only a reasonable belief backed by available material.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

ORDER

27.03.2025

This Order disposes of the Appeal Nos. FPA-PMLA-2257/ BBS/2018 filed by Sh. Krushna Chandra Das, FPA-PMLA-2258/ BBS/2018 filed by Smt. Rasmita Das, FPA-PMLA-2317/ BBS/2018 filed by Smt. Rasmita Nath, FPA-PMLA-2318/ BBS/2018 filed by Sh. Sangramjit Nath, FPA-PMLA-2272/BBS/2018, Sh. Siba Prasad Gocchi and FPA-PMLA-6529/BBS/2023 filed by Smt. Madusmita Gocchi. The aforementioned six Appellants have filed the Appeals u/s 26 of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act , 2002 (PMLA) challenging the Order dated 04.04.2018 (Impugned Order) passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority under PMLA confirming the Provisional Attachment Order No. 19/2017 dated 12.10.2017 (PAO) in ECIR No.02/BBSZO/2016.

2. Ld. Adjudicating Authority vide the Impugned Order has confirmed the provisional attachment of the following immovable properties: -

S. No.	Description	Name of Owner	Cost	Valuation Report
1.	A 31/2 storied green coloured building at Gandarpur Mouza near petrol pump	Siba Prasad Gochhi	60000/- +12311/- =72311/-	1,13,21,000/-
2.	Land at Gandarpur Mouza	Siba Prasad Gochhi	40000/- +7913/- =47,913/-
3.	Land at Gandarpur Mouza, Cuttack (1/6th share each)	Siba Prasad Gochhi Madhusmita Gochhi	266667/- +18842/- =2,85,509/-
4.	Land at Gandarpur Mouza, Cuttack (1/6th share each)	Siba Prasad Gochhi Madhusmita Gochhi	426667/- +30,035/- =4,56,702/-
5.	Land at Gandarpur Mouza, Cuttack (1/6th share each)	Siba Prasad Gochhi Madhusmita Gochhi	466667/- +51,692/- =5,18,359/-
6.	Land at Gandarpur (on which the building mentioned at Serial No.16 is constructed	Madhusmita Gochhi	75,000/- +14,864/- =89,864/-
7.	Land at Gandarpur	Madhusmita Gochhi	12,00,000/- +84,347/- =12,84,347/-
8.	Landed property at Gandarpur Mouza with construction of building (property being mortgaged at LIC HFL, Bhubaneswar)	Krushna Chandra Das	66000/-	24,30,000/-
9.	Land at Gandarpur	Krushna Chandra Das	50,000/-
10.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	3,18,750/-
11.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	1,28,500/-
12.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	1,25,000/- +2521/- +30,255/- =1,57,776/-
13.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	1,50,000/- +3027/- =1,53,027/-
14.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	13,53,790/-
15.	Land at Gandarpur	Krushna Chandra Das	7,28,750/- +36,450/- +14,947/- =7,80,147/-
16.	A3 storied building at Gandarpur Mouza	Krushna Chandra Das	309,000/- +18,700/- +4700/- =3,32,400/-	61,97,000/-
17.	Land at Gopalpur	Krushna Chandra Das	1,40,000/- +10,067/- +3000/- =1,53,067/-
18.	Land at Gopalpur	Krushna Chandra Das	260,000/- +16537/- +3500/- =2,80,037/-
19.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	2,85,000/- +5,992/- +855/- =2,91,847/-

20.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	2,00,000/- +10,010/- +4,282/- =2,14,292/-
21.	Land at Gandarpur	Krushna Chandra Das	24,00,000/- +1,20,050/- +48,035/- =25,68,085/-
22.	Land at Gandarpur	Krushna Chandra Das	24,00,000/- +1,20,050/- +48,357/- =25,68,407/-
23.	Land at Manguli	Krushna Chandra Das	30,000/- +882/- +1510/- =32,392/-
24.	Flat No.3C on 3rd floor, Type 3, Wing 3, Block 4 BMC Bhawani Sahid Nagar Enclave, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar (property being mortgaged at LIC HFL Bhubaneswar	Krushna Chandra Das	21,00,000/-
25.	Land at Gandarpur	Rasmita Das	24,00,000/- +1,68,407/- =25,68,407/-
26.	Land at Bhubaneswar Sahar Unit 27 Mouza Area Ac 0.040 dec. purchased on 09.09.2016	Rasmita Nath	18,24,000/- +91,200/- +36,752/- =19,51,952/-
27.	Land at Bhubaneswar Sahar Unit 27 Mouza Area Ac 0.048 dec. purchased on 09.09.2016	Rasmita Nath	2200000/- +1,10,000/- +44,272/- =23,54,272/-

3. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant Sh. Krushna Chandra Das stated that the Appellant is engaged in transportation and construction business and is also having income from agriculture. The Appellant’s income as well as the income tax document has not been contested by the Respondent. The income derived by the Appellant is over a period of 20 years for which Krushna Das produced the income tax returns from the FY 1997-98 to 2015-16. The Respondent Directorate has considered income of Krushna Das as Rs. 2,44,89,781 whereas the income of Krushna Das up to 31.03.2016 is Rs. 3,16,05,732. Th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(ATFP) 283

The court upheld the attachment of properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, affirming the reasonable belief standard for provisional orders despite challenges relating to evidence.

Cases Referred (2)

Login now and unlock premium legal research