Candour Legal – Best Lawyers in Ahmedabad | Law firm in Ahmedabad

Menu
+91 72288 88745
en English
enEnglish fr French ru Russian cn Mandarin Chinese

Say Hello,

contact@candourlegal.com
+91 72288 88745
linkedin

Our Practice Area

PMLA & White-Collar Defence in India

Last reviewed: 24 April 2026

White-collar and economic-offence enforcement in India today runs primarily through the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and the Financial Intelligence Unit — India (FIU-IND), alongside the CBI, SFIO, and sectoral regulators. The PMLA has evolved from a narrow response to drug trafficking into the most expansive economic-offence statute in India, with attachments, arrests, and prosecutions reaching business promoters, bankers, public servants, crypto businesses, and cross-border actors. A second, parallel enforcement track — the PMLA Appellate Tribunal and the Supreme Court’s post-Vijay Madanlal Choudhary jurisprudence — has begun to construct the guardrails. This page is the entry point to Candour Legal’s analysis of that framework.

How the PMLA Actually Works

The PMLA criminalises the process of projecting or claiming property obtained from a scheduled (predicate) offence as untainted property. Section 3 defines the offence; Section 4 provides for punishment of rigorous imprisonment of three to seven years (ten years for offences involving the NDPS Act). Unlike most criminal statutes, the PMLA operates on three parallel tracks that the Enforcement Directorate can deploy independently:

  • Attachment track (Sections 5 and 8): provisional attachment of property believed to be proceeds of crime, followed by adjudication by the Adjudicating Authority and appeal to the PMLA Appellate Tribunal.
  • Arrest and prosecution track (Sections 19 and 45): arrest by the ED followed by special-court prosecution, with the twin conditions of Section 45 imposing a near-universal bar on bail unless the special conditions are satisfied.
  • Search and seizure track (Sections 17 and 18): search of premises and persons, seizure of records and property, and freezing of bank accounts and other financial assets.

The PMLA’s reach is further extended by Section 50 (power to summon and record statements, whose evidentiary value was affirmed in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, 2022), Section 24 (presumption in inter-connected transactions), and the Schedule defining over 200 predicate offences across more than 30 statutes.

Attachment and the Proceeds of Crime Question

The foundational concept under the PMLA is “proceeds of crime” as defined in Section 2(1)(u): property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence, including the value of any such property. The expansive reading given to this definition by the ED — covering derivative value, replacement assets, and property acquired over long time horizons — has been the single largest source of litigation under the PMLA.

The PMLA Appellate Tribunal’s April 2026 ruling in the Avinash Bhosale matter, setting aside ED attachments in the Yes Bank-DHFL case, is a significant marker in this jurisprudence. The Tribunal’s reasoning on the jurisdictional limits of attachment — where the alleged nexus between the property and the predicate offence is insufficiently established — provides a template for challenges to attachment orders beyond the specific facts of that case.

Related reading: PMLA Tribunal’s Bhosale Ruling: A Judicial Check on ED Overreach.

FIU-IND and the Reporting-Entity Regime

The PMLA’s second enforcement arm is the Financial Intelligence Unit — India, which operates the Reporting-Entity regime. Banks, NBFCs, housing finance companies, payment-system operators, stock exchanges, insurance companies, real-estate agents in certain categories, dealers in precious metals and stones, chartered accountants in specified transactions, company secretaries, and — since March 2023 — Virtual Digital Asset Service Providers are classified as Reporting Entities with STR/CTR filing, KYC, and record-keeping obligations.

FIU-IND has increasingly deployed its enforcement authority. The December 2023 show-cause notices against nine offshore crypto exchanges, Binance’s August 2024 registration with an INR 18.82 crore compounding settlement, and the 2025 INR 9.27 crore penalty against Bybit are the most-cited recent actions. The same enforcement mechanics — penalty orders, blocking of URLs by MeitY, and corrective action plans — are available against Reporting Entities across sectors.

Related reading: FIU-IND Registration for Crypto Businesses · How to Register with FIU-IND · Ongoing AML Compliance and Enforcement Lessons from Binance and Bybit.

The Other Enforcement Agencies

  • CBI: investigation of offences against public servants and major economic offences under the DSPE Act, 1946. CBI investigations frequently generate the predicate offences that trigger subsequent PMLA proceedings by the ED.
  • SFIO (Serious Fraud Investigation Office): investigation of fraud under the Companies Act, 2013, primarily involving listed entities, large unlisted companies, and inter-connected corporate groups.
  • SEBI: investigation of securities-market offences under the SEBI Act, 1992, including insider trading, market manipulation, and front-running. SEBI orders can generate predicate offences for subsequent ED action.
  • CBDT / Income Tax Department: investigation of direct-tax offences, benami transactions under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, and black-money offences under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015.
  • DGFT and Customs: investigation of foreign-trade and customs offences, including over-invoicing, under-invoicing, and drawback fraud.

The Defence Architecture

PMLA defence is conducted in three phases, each with distinct strategic considerations.

Pre-attachment and pre-arrest

Where the ED has issued summons under Section 50 but has not yet attached property or effected arrest, the defence focus is on structured engagement with the investigation, documentary disclosure where appropriate, and protection of constitutional rights in recording of statements. Parallel civil remedies — writ proceedings challenging the jurisdictional basis of the investigation, where available — may also be pursued.

Post-attachment

A provisional attachment order under Section 5 is followed by confirmation or setting aside by the Adjudicating Authority within 180 days under Section 8. The Adjudicating Authority proceedings are the first genuine forum for challenging the factual and legal basis of the attachment. The PMLA Appellate Tribunal is the next forum, with further appeal to the jurisdictional High Court on substantial questions of law.

Post-arrest and prosecution

Bail under Section 45 is the foundational litigation of any post-arrest PMLA defence. The twin conditions — reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, and unlikely to commit any offence while on bail — have been narrowly construed but are not absolute, particularly where the prosecution case on predicate offence is weak or where procedural violations attended the arrest. The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence in Senthil Balaji v. State (2023) and subsequent cases has refined the standards for PMLA arrest and remand.

Trial before the Special Court is conducted under CrPC (now BNSS) procedures, modified by the PMLA’s provisions on burden of proof (Section 24) and admissibility of Section 50 statements. Acquittal strategies typically focus on the sufficiency of the predicate offence, the nexus between the alleged proceeds and the predicate offence, and the mens rea threshold under Section 3.

Sectors and Fact Patterns

PMLA enforcement in India today clusters around identifiable fact patterns:

  • Bank fraud: borrower defaults combined with alleged diversion of loan proceeds, typically involving the CBI as investigator of predicate offence and the ED as investigator of money laundering. Yes Bank, DHFL, IL&FS, and Bhushan Steel are the recurring file references.
  • Political corruption: allegations of public-servant corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 feeding into PMLA attachments against politicians, relatives, and associated entities.
  • Crypto and Virtual Digital Assets: the Binance and Bybit enforcement arc, Indian-exchange registration requirements, and individual trader exposure through Section 148A notices feeding into PMLA referral.
  • Real-estate laundering: attachment of properties acquired through alleged proceeds of scheduled offences, often involving benami transactions under the 1988 Act.
  • Shell companies and layered transactions: SFIO investigations feeding into PMLA actions where corporate structures are alleged to have been used to layer the movement of funds.
  • Foreign-exchange and cross-border: joint FEMA-PMLA actions against entities alleged to have routed funds outside India through the Hawala system or unreported foreign bank accounts.
  • NBFC and payments-sector enforcement: FIU-IND penalty actions against Reporting Entities for STR/CTR filing defaults, KYC gaps, or failure to maintain prescribed records.

The Post-Vijay Madanlal Jurisprudential Landscape

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld the core of the PMLA’s enforcement architecture, including Section 19 arrest, Section 50 statements, Section 24 presumption, and the Section 45 twin conditions. However, the judgment and its progeny have also begun to set meaningful outer limits:

  • Predicate-offence dependency: PMLA proceedings cannot continue where the predicate offence has been quashed or the accused acquitted.
  • Reasoned grounds of arrest: Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) requires written grounds of arrest to be supplied to the accused, not merely communicated orally.
  • ECIR status and supply: the ED’s internal Enforcement Case Information Report does not have to be supplied to the accused, but arrest must be predicated on material disclosed in grounds of arrest.
  • Remand standards: Senthil Balaji and subsequent cases have refined what constitutes valid ED remand.
  • Attachment limits: the Bhosale line of PMLA Appellate Tribunal decisions is drawing firmer lines around the nexus requirement between alleged proceeds and predicate offence.

How Candour Legal Advises

Candour Legal advises individuals, promoters, listed and unlisted companies, financial institutions, crypto businesses, and public servants on the full range of PMLA and economic-offence matters. The practice covers:

  • Attachment and Tribunal proceedings: representation at the Adjudicating Authority, before the PMLA Appellate Tribunal, and in writ challenges before the High Courts.
  • Bail and trial: Section 45 bail applications, trial defence before Special Courts, and appeals.
  • Pre-investigation advisory: internal investigations, response to ED/CBI/SFIO summons, privilege protection, and document production strategy.
  • FIU-IND compliance and enforcement: Reporting-Entity registration, AML/KYC programme design, STR/CTR filing, and response to FIU-IND show-cause notices.
  • Corporate white-collar compliance: internal reporting frameworks under the Companies Act, 2013, Section 177 audit-committee work, whistleblower programmes, and POSH/bribery-risk assessment.
  • Predicate-offence defence: parallel representation in the predicate CBI, SFIO, SEBI, or sectoral regulator proceedings that underlie the PMLA case.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the ED attach my property without arrest?
Yes. Attachment under Section 5 of the PMLA is an independent track that does not require arrest. It requires a reason-to-believe recording by the Director or authorised officer and confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority within 180 days.

What is a predicate offence under the PMLA?
An offence listed in the Schedule to the PMLA, ranging from corruption (Prevention of Corruption Act) to fraud (IPC/BNS), narcotics (NDPS), forest offences, and over 30 other statutes. PMLA jurisdiction depends on the registration of a scheduled offence; quashing or acquittal on the predicate offence typically terminates the PMLA proceedings.

What is the difference between ED and CBI?
The CBI investigates predicate offences such as corruption, bank fraud, and high-value economic offences, typically on the basis of specific Central Government notifications or High Court directions. The ED investigates the downstream money-laundering offence under the PMLA and the foreign-exchange offence under FEMA. In many cases both agencies investigate the same underlying fact pattern in parallel.

Are Section 50 statements admissible against me?
The Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary upheld the admissibility of Section 50 statements against the maker, subject to the procedural protections of the PMLA. Statements recorded under Section 50 can be used in the PMLA trial without amounting to a violation of Article 20(3) of the Constitution.

What is the Section 45 twin test for bail?
A court considering PMLA bail must be satisfied that (a) there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty of the offence, and (b) the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The burden is on the accused and the standard has been read strictly, though not absolutely, in the post-Vijay Madanlal Choudhary jurisprudence.

Does the PMLA apply to crypto businesses?
Yes. The Ministry of Finance Notification of 7 March 2023 brought Virtual Digital Asset Service Providers within the definition of Reporting Entities under the PMLA. VDA businesses carrying on the five designated activities must register with FIU-IND, file STRs and CTRs, and comply with KYC and record-keeping requirements.

Read our PMLA and enforcement analysis

This page is analytical commentary on Indian law, not legal advice. Please see our Disclaimer and Terms of Use. For engagement enquiries, write to contact@candourlegal.com.