The Supreme Court of India disposed of Special Leave Petition filed by M3M India Pvt. Ltd. and M3M India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., granting permission to substitute provisionally attached properties with unencumbered commercial units, subject to stringent conditions. The appeal arose from an order passed by the Sikkim High Court on 27 June 2023 in connection with provisional attachments made under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
The petitioners sought the substitution of provisionally attached properties pursuant to Provisional Attachment Order No. 06/2024 dated 18 July 2024. The substitute assets offered comprised unsold commercial units from the “M3M Broadway” project in Gurugram, Haryana. These included 274 units valued at ₹275 crores and an additional 43 units valued at ₹42 crores bringing the total valuation to ₹317 crores, as assessed by independent valuer M/s CSV Techno Solutions LLP.
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), represented by counsel Zoheb Hossain, agreed to the substitution proposal but insisted on several protective conditions. These included the submission of no-encumbrance certificates, notarised undertakings not to alienate the substituted properties, deposit of original title documents with the ED or court, an indemnity bond against legal deficiencies, and detailed disclosure of the source of acquisition funds. Additional safeguards were imposed to protect third-party interests in the commercial project and ensure ongoing cooperation with the ED’s investigation.
The petitioners, represented by Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, accepted all nine conditions in a formal affidavit. The Court, comprising Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and R. Mahadevan, allowed the substitution on the basis of these terms and recorded that nothing further survived in the matter.
While disposing of the petition, the Court clarified that the order was passed in the facts and circumstances of the case and would not serve as a binding precedent. All pending applications were also disposed of accordingly.
Appearances :
Petitioner: Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. ; Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Atul Nanda, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Rajat Joneja, Adv. ; Mr. Yash Verma, Adv.; Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Adv.; Mr. Ashish Garg, Adv.; Mr. Rishi Sehgal, Adv.; Ms. Muskaan Khurana, Adv. Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR;
Respondent: Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General(N/P); Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G.(N/P); Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv.; Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv.; Mr. Prasenjeet Mohapatra, Adv.; Ms. Saumya Tandon, Adv.; Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv.; Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR; Ms. Bhawna Gandhi, Adv
Read Order
