Provisional attachment and revenue entry became infructuous after quashing of predicate and money laundering proceedings; deletion ordered.

Where the predicate criminal case and the consequential money laundering proceedings had already been quashed, the writ challenge to the provisional attachment of the petitioner's property became infructuous and no merits determination was required. However, because the petitioner's property had been wrongly reflected in the attachment-related revenue record, the Sub Registrar was directed to delete the entry concerning the relevant survey number. The decision thus treats the challenge to attachment as spent by the quashing of the underlying proceedings, while ensuring that the mistaken registration entry is removed from the record.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the provisional attachment and the corresponding revenue entry in respect of the petitioner's property survived after the predicate offence and the proceedings under the money laundering law had been quashed, and whether the registration entry had to be deleted.

Analysis: The proceedings against the concerned entity had already been quashed, including the predicate criminal case and the consequential proceedings under the money laundering law. In that situation, the challenge to the provisional attachment no longer required adjudication on merits and had become infructuous. At the same time, since the petitioner's property had been wrongly reflected in the attachment-related entry, the entry maintained by the Sub Registrar in respect of the survey number had to be removed.

Conclusion: The writ petition was infructuous, but the Sub Registrar was directed to delete any entry relating to the petitioner's property made pursuant to the Enforcement Directorate proceedings.

---