PMLA Tribunal Grants Major Relief to Avinash Bhosale, Quashes Most ED Attachments in Yes Bank DHFL Case

PMLA Tribunal grants relief to Avinash Bhosale, quashes most ED attachments in Yes Bank–DHFL case, retains only ₹25 crore attachment.

New Delhi, April 20, 2026: In a significant development under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Appellate Tribunal has granted major relief to real estate developer Avinash Bhosale and his associated entities, setting aside the majority of provisional attachment orders issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The case originated from a wider probe into alleged financial irregularities involving Yes Bank and DHFL. According to allegations, Yes Bank had invested ₹3,700 crore in DHFL debentures in 2018, with claims of kickbacks and fund diversion. The ED alleged that around ₹164.67 crore routed through various entities eventually reached firms linked to Bhosale and constituted “proceeds of crime.”

However, the Tribunal found several flaws in the agency’s case and ruled largely in favour of Bhosale.

No Evidence Linking Transactions to Crime

A key observation by the Tribunal was that several loan agreements involving Bhosale’s entities were executed as early as 2014 – well before the alleged offence in 2018. It held that there was no material to establish that these transactions were connected to any future wrongdoing or that Bhosale had prior knowledge of any alleged crime.

The Tribunal emphasized that legitimate business transactions cannot be retrospectively termed suspicious simply because funds later passed through related entities.

ED Cannot Judge Commercial Decisions

Rejecting the ED’s claim that certain loan agreements were “commercially irrational,” the Tribunal clarified that assessing business viability does not fall within the agency’s jurisdiction unless directly linked to a proven offence.

It noted that in the absence of complaints from parties or evidence of illegality, such agreements cannot be labelled bogus.

Consultancy Payments Held Valid

The ED had questioned ₹71.82 crore paid to Bhosale-linked entities by DHFL as “bogus consultancy.” However, the Tribunal upheld these transactions, pointing out that the agreements were signed before the alleged offence and were supported by proper documentation, including invoices and records of services rendered.

It observed that treating such pre-existing legitimate transactions as money laundering would be legally untenable.

Tribunal Flags ED Overreach

In a strong remark, the Tribunal noted that the ED had gone beyond the scope of the FIR and ECIR by investigating transactions not linked to the predicate offence or alleged to be illegal. This, it said, amounted to jurisdictional overreach.

Partial Relief: ₹25 Crore Attachment Upheld

While granting substantial relief, the Tribunal upheld attachment worth ₹25 crore related to a delayed payment in a dairy sale transaction. All other attachments were set aside.

Significance of the Ruling

The verdict marks an important judicial check on broad interpretations of money laundering laws, reinforcing that legitimate business dealings cannot be criminalized without concrete evidence.

Follow us On Our Social media Handles :
Instagram
Youtube
Facebook
Twitter

Also Read- Pune