PMLA attachment cannot continue after acquittal in the predicate offence; release of property was directed to be recorded.

Attachment over property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act could not continue where the predicate NDPS proceedings had ended in acquittal and the appellate tribunal had already directed release of the attached assets. On those facts, the property could no longer be treated as continuing to represent proceeds of crime, and the Court directed that the attachment be raised. The registering authority was also required to record the release in the relevant records. The Court noted the statutory remedy under Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in support of the release of the property.

---

---

Issues: Whether the attachment over the subject properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be raised and the registering authority directed to record the release.

Analysis: The attachment had been made in connection with proceedings arising from the predicate offence. The appellate tribunal had already directed release of the attached properties after noting that the accused had been acquitted in the predicate NDPS proceedings. In that situation, the attached properties could not be treated as continuing to stand attached on the premise of proceeds of crime. The Court also noticed the statutory remedy under Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Conclusion: The attachment was raised and the registering authority was directed to record the release in the relevant records.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the predicate offence has ended in acquittal and the appellate tribunal has directed release of the attached property, the attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot continue to subsist.

---