Delhi High Court Upholds ED’s Power to Attach Properties from Illegal Cricket Betting as Proceeds of Crime
Court Clarifies: Betting Profits Linked to Criminal Acts Fall Under PMLA
Properties Acquired Through Tainted Money Can Be Seized by Enforcement Directorate
By Our Legal Reporter
New Delhi: November 25, 2025:
In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has upheld the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) authority to attach properties acquired from illegal cricket betting money, declaring such assets as “proceeds of crime” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The ruling came in the case of Naresh Bansal and Others vs. Adjudicating Authority and Another, where several accused challenged ED’s provisional attachment orders.
Also Read: IBBI Issues New 2025 Guidelines to Speed Up Insolvency Professional Appointments Across India
The Court clarified that even though cricket betting is not listed as a scheduled offence under PMLA, profits generated through criminal acts associated with betting—such as forgery, cheating, and conspiracy—qualify as proceeds of crime and can be attached.
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from an international cricket betting operation that allegedly generated huge sums of money.
- In 2015, the ED issued provisional attachment orders against properties worth around ₹20 crore belonging to individuals accused of participating in the betting racket.
- The accused argued that since cricket betting is not a scheduled offence under PMLA, the ED had no authority to attach their properties.
- They filed petitions before the Delhi High Court challenging the attachment orders.
Also Read: Justice Surya Kant: India’s 53rd Chief Justice Highlights Human Side of Judging
The High Court, however, dismissed the petitions and upheld ED’s actions.
Court’s Observations
The Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar made several key observations:
- Cricket betting profits are proceeds of crime: Even if betting itself is not a scheduled offence, the money generated through criminal acts linked to betting can be treated as tainted property.
- Section 2(1)(u) of PMLA applies: The definition of “proceeds of crime” under PMLA includes property derived from criminal activity related to scheduled offences.
- Downstream activities matter: If tainted money is invested in downstream activities such as real estate or business ventures, the profits generated from those activities also qualify as proceeds of crime.
- ED’s attachment powers valid: The Court upheld ED’s authority to attach properties acquired through illegal betting money, reinforcing the agency’s role in combating money laundering.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Protects Tesla Trademark: Bars Indian Firm from Using ‘Tesla’ Name for EVs
Wider Legal Context
This ruling is consistent with earlier judicial interpretations:
- The Supreme Court in Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer (2014) clarified the admissibility of electronic evidence, which often plays a role in betting investigations.
- The Delhi High Court has previously upheld ED’s powers in cases involving hawala transactions and illegal gambling.
- The judgment reinforces the principle that illegal profits, even from activities not directly listed as scheduled offences, can still be treated as proceeds of crime if linked to criminal acts.
Also Read: Supreme Court Clears $570M Settlement in Sandesara Brothers’ $1.6B Bank Fraud Case
Implications for Taxpayers and Businesses
The ruling has significant implications:
- Strengthened ED powers: The judgment expands ED’s scope to act against illegal betting and gambling operations.
- Deterrent effect: Individuals involved in betting rackets face the risk of losing properties acquired through tainted money.
- Business caution: Companies and investors must ensure that funds used in transactions are legitimate, as investments linked to tainted money can be seized.
- Legal clarity: The ruling provides clear guidance on how PMLA applies to profits from illegal betting.
Expert Views
Legal experts and financial analysts have welcomed the ruling:
- Lawyers argue that the judgment strengthens India’s fight against money laundering and illegal betting.
- Policy analysts note that the ruling closes loopholes that allowed individuals to escape scrutiny by claiming betting was not a scheduled offence.
- Industry leaders believe the decision will discourage illegal betting syndicates and promote transparency in financial transactions.
Broader Impact on Enforcement
The ruling is expected to reshape enforcement strategies:
- The ED can now confidently attach properties linked to illegal betting operations, even if betting itself is not a scheduled offence.
- The judgment may prompt the GST Council and Finance Ministry to consider stricter regulations on online betting and gambling platforms.
- It sets a precedent that could influence similar cases across India, ensuring uniform application of PMLA provisions.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s ruling in the Naresh Bansal case is a landmark in India’s fight against money laundering and illegal betting. By clarifying that properties acquired from illegal cricket betting money can be attached as proceeds of crime, the Court has strengthened ED’s enforcement powers and reinforced the principle of accountability in financial transactions.
This decision ensures that individuals cannot escape scrutiny by exploiting technical loopholes. It underscores the importance of transparency, fairness, and justice in India’s legal and financial systems.
🔑 Suggested Keywords for SEO (Google + ChatGPT)
- Delhi High Court ED cricket betting ruling
- ED attaches property proceeds of crime PMLA
- Naresh Bansal vs Adjudicating Authority case
- Illegal cricket betting money laundering India
- Delhi HC judgment November 2025
- Enforcement Directorate powers under PMLA
- Cricket betting scam property attachment
- Proceeds of crime definition Section 2(1)(u) PMLA
- Delhi HC ruling on betting and money laundering
- Landmark judgment ED property attachment
Also Read: Allahabad High Court: GST Department Cannot Invoke Section 74 Without Fraud Findings
Also Read: Himachal Pradesh High Court Rules: Only Surviving Spouse Can Inherit Tenancy Rights
Also Read: Supreme Court Flags Disturbing Trend: Criminal Law Misused When Consensual Relationships Break Down