Provisional attachment of property sustained where payments overlapped with the alleged offence period and matched traced proceeds of crime.

Property acquired through staggered payments made during the alleged commission period of the scheduled offence was treated as linked to the traced proceeds of crime, and the attachment was found to disclose no legal infirmity. Because the property could not be released while the predicate criminal trial remained pending, the provisional attachment was sustained until the prosecution reached finality. The appeal therefore failed and the appellant was not entitled to release of the property at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confirmation of attachment of the appellant's property, claimed to have been acquired partly through installments paid during the period of the predicate offence, was liable to be set aside in appeal.

Analysis: The property was found to have been acquired through staggered payments commencing from 2007, which overlapped with the period in which the scheduled offence was alleged to have been committed. The amount paid by the appellant was treated as broadly corresponding to the alleged proceeds of crime traced to him. In these circumstances, the property could not be released at the stage of pending trial in the predicate offence, and the attachment was not shown to suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference.

Conclusion: The attachment was upheld and the appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The provisional attachment remained operative during the pendency of the criminal trial, and the appellant was not entitled to release of the property at this stage.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a property is acquired through payments made during the commission period of the scheduled offence and the traced amount is commensurate with the alleged proceeds of crime, the attachment may be sustained until the predicate prosecution reaches finality.

---