Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeCompany & PMLAED Files PMLA Prosecution Complaint Against Former Madhya Pradesh Excise Officer in...

ED Files PMLA Prosecution Complaint Against Former Madhya Pradesh Excise Officer in ₹18.20 Crore Disproportionate Assets Case

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Bhopal Zonal Office, has filed a Prosecution Complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 against former District Excise Officer of Alirajpur, Dharmendra Singh Bhadauria, before the Special Court (PMLA) in Indore. The Special Court has taken cognizance of the complaint and issued notice to the accused.

The money laundering investigation was initiated by the ED on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) registered by the Special Police Establishment (SPE), Lokayukta, Indore. The FIR alleged that Bhadauria had amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income while serving in the Excise Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. The case was registered under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended in 2018.

According to the ED, its investigation revealed that Bhadauria knowingly acquired, possessed, concealed and projected proceeds of crime as untainted by investing illicit funds in high-value movable and immovable assets. These investments were allegedly made not only in his own name but also in the names of his family members. The agency alleged that the assets were grossly disproportionate to his lawful sources of income and therefore constituted “proceeds of crime” under the provisions of the PMLA.

The Enforcement Directorate stated that the total proceeds of crime identified and quantified during the investigation amount to approximately ₹18.20 crore.

Earlier in the investigation, the ED had provisionally attached movable and immovable properties worth ₹18.20 crore under Section 5(1) of the PMLA. The attached assets include cash, gold and silver, immovable properties and other assets allegedly acquired from the proceeds of crime.

The filing of the prosecution complaint marks the next stage in the money laundering proceedings, with the Special Court set to examine the allegations and proceed in accordance with law.

Read More: Gift to Parents is Tax-Free, But Don’t Ignore These Income Tax Compliances

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Personal Hearing Can’t Precede Deadline for GST Notice Reply: Uttarakhand High Court Quashes S. 73 Order

The Uttarakhand High Court has set aside a GST assessment order after finding that...

GST Rectification Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because 3 Month Timeline Expired; Authority Doesn’t Become Functus Officio: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that a GST rectification application filed within the...

Electricity Charges Arise Only After Supply and Billing; Supreme Court Rejects Rs. 57.74 Lakh Demand for Unreleased Additional Load

The Supreme Court has rejected an electricity distribution company’s attempt to recover ₹57.74 lakh...

Refund of Interest Paid on GST Liability Discharged Through ITC: GSTAT Restrains State Benches From Deciding Appeals

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has restrained...

More like this

Personal Hearing Can’t Precede Deadline for GST Notice Reply: Uttarakhand High Court Quashes S. 73 Order

The Uttarakhand High Court has set aside a GST assessment order after finding that...

GST Rectification Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because 3 Month Timeline Expired; Authority Doesn’t Become Functus Officio: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that a GST rectification application filed within the...

Electricity Charges Arise Only After Supply and Billing; Supreme Court Rejects Rs. 57.74 Lakh Demand for Unreleased Additional Load

The Supreme Court has rejected an electricity distribution company’s attempt to recover ₹57.74 lakh...