Writ review under Article 226 was treated as maintainable where...

Writ review under Article 226 was treated as maintainable where the challenge to provisional attachment under PMLA alleged jurisdictional error and failure to satisfy statutory preconditions, notwithstanding the alternative statutory remedy. Provisional attachment was described as a preventive measure, not a transfer of title, and the authorised officer's satisfaction had to rest on material showing proceeds of crime and a risk of concealment, transfer or dealing to frustrate confiscation. On the facts, the recorded materials were found sufficient. The Court also accepted that property equivalent in value may be attached even if the specific asset was purchased before the scheduled offence. It further examined whether reasons to believe must appear in the order, and referred the conflicting view to a larger Bench.