The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed appeals filed by relatives of former collector Ranu Sahu, upholding the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) attachment of properties in the alleged coal levy scam. The court ruled that even assets acquired before the offence can be seized as equivalent to proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Court Ruling
A division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, in its April 22 order, found no merit in the pleas challenging the ED's action. The appeals arose from a common order dated October 16, 2025, by the appellate tribunal under the SAFEMA Act, which had upheld the confirmation of a provisional attachment issued by the ED in May 2023.
Background of the Case
The attachment relates to properties allegedly linked to proceeds of crime in an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) connected to a coal transportation extortion racket. The case stems from an FIR registered in 2022 in Bengaluru, which alleged obstruction of income tax officials and destruction of evidence tied to an illegal coal levy scheme involving collection of Rs 25 per tonne from transporters.
Subsequently, the ED initiated money laundering proceedings, alleging that a syndicate led by Suryakant Tiwari collected illegal funds with the support of officials and invested the proceeds in properties. It alleged that Ranu Sahu, while serving as collector in coal-rich districts such as Korba and Raigarh, facilitated the levy and received bribes that were routed into assets held in the names of relatives. The ED has pegged the proceeds of crime linked to her at around Rs 5.52 crore.
Arguments and Rejection
Counsel for the appellants argued that Sahu was not named in the original FIR and that no scheduled offence existed at the time of attachment. They also contended that the properties were acquired prior to the alleged offence period and had no nexus with proceeds of crime, calling the tribunal's orders mechanical and unsupported by evidence.
Rejecting these arguments, the court held that attachment under PMLA can extend to properties equivalent in value to the proceeds of crime, even if acquired earlier, and upheld the ED's action.
