Bombay HC ruled ED cannot retain seized property beyond 180 days under PMLA without prior approval from adjudicating authority. Unapproved retention is illegal, and authorities must return seized items or seek timely extension.
ED Cannot Retain Seized Property Beyond 180 Days Without Approval: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court held that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot retain property seized under PMLA beyond 180 days without prior permission from the Adjudicating Authority. The Court directed the return of electronic devices and release of a frozen bank locker, emphasizing strict compliance with timelines under Section 17(2A) as amended in 2024.
The Court rejected ED’s reliance on implied continuation of custody, stating that retention beyond 180 days without explicit authorization is unlawful. The ruling interprets PMLA Section 17(2A), which mandates filing of an extension application before the expiry of the initial period. The Court emphasized procedural safeguards against indefinite state custody of assets.
Retention of seized assets beyond 180 days without prior order of the Adjudicating Authority is impermissible and violates due process,stated the judgment.
This decision imposes stricter accountability on investigating agencies and mandates legal teams to monitor statutory deadlines rigorously. It also strengthens the rights of individuals and entities under investigation, requiring authorities to justify prolonged control over seized property within the adjudicative framework.
Citations
- Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Section 17(2A)
