ED Can Attach Property From Illegal Cricket Betting Activities as ‘Proceeds of Crime’: Delhi HC

It is most significant to note that the Delhi High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Naresh Bansal & Ors vs Adjudicating Authority And Anr in W.P.(C) 11361/2015, CM APPL. 29836/2015 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2025:DHC:10341-DB that was reserved on 23.09.2025 and then finally pronounced on 24.11.2025 has minced absolutely just no words to hold in no uncertain terms that though cricket betting is not a separate predicate offence under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2022, the property generated from such illegal activities can be attached by the Enforcement Directorate.

- 

To put it differently, we thus see that the Delhi High Court has made it absolutely clear that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can treat money and property derived from cricket betting using forgery, cheating or criminal conspiracy as proceeds of crime in a money laundering case. It is also worth paying attention that a Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising of Hon'ble Mr Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Hon'ble Mr Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar issued this most commendable order while dismissing petitions challenging the probe agency’s provisional attachment orders issued more than a decade ago in an alleged multi-crore international cricket betting scam.

What certainly cannot be left unnoticed is that the Delhi High Court noted that the ED’s action stemmed from an alleged international cricket betting and hawala racket run through the United Kingdom-based website Betfair.com. We must note that the ED pointed out that the operation was being managed from a farmhouse near Vadodara by Girish ‘Tommy’ Patel and his associates. So they came under radar of ED.

To recapitulate, the ED carried out searches in May 2015 at the farmhouse and at the home of key associates. In September 2015, the ED then provisionally attached movable and immovable assets worth around Rs 20 crore belonging to the accused, followed by a show cause notice the next month under the PMLA. The accused later contested both actions before the Delhi High Court. But the Court very rightly upheld orders attaching the properties of people involved in an international betting operation.