Proceeds of Crime Nexus Sustains Provisional Attachment Despite disputed involvement and no reappraisal of evidence

A provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act was sustained because the record showed a prima facie nexus between the property and alleged proceeds of crime from illegal quarrying and the receipt of money for handing over the quarry. The tribunal accepted the Enforcement Directorate's material, including enquiry statements, the evaluation report and the trial court's prima facie finding, and held that the appellants could not defeat attachment by disputing their role or shifting blame to the sub-lessee. It also refused to re-appreciate evidence in appeal, so the attachment was confirmed and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confirmation of provisional attachment of the appellants' property under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 was justified on the basis that the property represented proceeds of crime arising from the alleged illegal quarrying and the receipt of Rs. 60 lakhs for handing over the quarry.

Analysis: The appellate tribunal accepted the material relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate, including the investigation record, statements recorded during enquiry, the evaluation report on the quarrying activity, and the trial court's finding that there was a prima facie case linking the appellants with the alleged wrongful gain. It held that the appellants could not avoid attachment merely by disputing their involvement or by contending that the illegal activity was carried out by the sub-lessee. The tribunal also declined to re-appreciate the evidence in appeal against the attachment order.

Conclusion: The confirmation of attachment was upheld and the challenge to the impugned order failed.

Final Conclusion: The property remained under attachment, and the appeals were rejected for want of merit.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the material on record discloses a prima facie nexus between the attached property and alleged criminal proceeds, the attachment can be sustained and the appellate forum will not interfere merely on a disputed reappraisal of evidence.

---