Confiscation under PMLA can proceed despite the accused's death where property is linked to proceeds of crime and unexplained.

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 permits attachment, confirmation, confiscation and release of property even if the principal trial cannot be completed because the accused has died. The special statutory scheme prevails over general criminal-law principles, including the presumption of innocence, and proceedings may apply a reverse burden in relation to proceeds of crime. On the material recorded, the property was treated as alternate property linked to proceeds of crime, and the petitioner did not establish a legitimate source or rebut the basis for attachment. Confiscation was therefore upheld and release refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order directing confiscation of the attached property could be interfered with on the ground that the principal accused had died during trial and whether the petitioner was entitled to release of the property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis: The statutory scheme permits confiscation or release of property even where the trial cannot be concluded because of the death of the accused. The presumption of innocence and the principle applied in general criminal law do not override the special scheme of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which contains specific provisions for attachment, confirmation, confiscation and release of property. The Act also incorporates a reverse burden in proceedings relating to proceeds of crime, and the material on record showed that the property in question represented alternate property linked to the proceeds of crime. The petitioner failed to establish a legitimate source for the property or to rebut the material supporting attachment and confiscation.

Conclusion: The challenge to confiscation failed. The property was held liable to confiscation, and release of the property was refused.

---