PMLA attachment fails when the predicate offence ends in final acquittal and the property basis no longer survives.

Provisional attachment under PMLA was held unsustainable where the scheduled offence ended in acquittal on merits and that acquittal attained finality, because the foundation for treating the properties as involved in money laundering no longer survived on the facts. The Tribunal also found that the attachment order did not fairly consider the appellants' material and explanations. Although the amendment to section 8(3)(b) was treated as prospective, relief was granted in any event because the predicate offence had been finally concluded in favour of the accused. The attachment and confirmation order were set aside and the properties directed to be released.

---

---

Issues: Whether the provisional attachment and the confirmation order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could survive after the appellant was acquitted of the scheduled offence and the acquittal attained finality.

Analysis: The proceedings arose from allegations of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which formed the basis of the money-laundering action. The Special Court subsequently acquitted the accused after trial, and no appeal was filed against that judgment. The Tribunal held that the impugned attachment order did not fairly consider the material and explanations filed by the appellants, and that once the scheduled offence had ended in acquittal on merits, the foundation for treating the properties as involved in money laundering no longer survived on the facts of the case. The Tribunal also noted that the relevant amendment to section 8(3)(b) operated prospectively, but concluded that the appellants were entitled to relief in any event because the acquittal in the predicate offence had attained finality.

Conclusion: The provisional attachment and the confirmation order were unsustainable and were set aside, and the attached properties were directed to be released.

---