The Bombay High Court on Wednesday reserved its order on the petitions filed by Axis Bank and businessman Deepak Kochhar against the Enforcement Directorate (ED) seeking limited interim relief against the attachment of NuPower Renewables’ wind power assets in the Videocon–ICICI Bank-linked money laundering case.
The bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Shyam Chandak was hearing appeals challenging the attachment of assets, arguing that it far exceeded the alleged Rs 64-crore proceeds of crime involved in the case.
The Bench clarified that it is limiting the adjudication of the petitions to an interim challenge concerning NuPower’s wind farm assets, allowing both parties to file charts explaining their interpretation of the valuation exercise.
In the previous hearing, the bench directed the ED to clearly demonstrate how it had arrived at the valuation of the attached properties.
Kochhar argued that a key project was originally pegged at around Rs 33.15 crore, and that the attachment extended to assets worth about Rs 74 crore when the alleged proceeds of crime were Rs 64 crore.
The court took note of the argument that valuation must be as on the date of acquisition and that using a later benchmark, such as 2019 depreciated values, to retrospectively include assets into the alleged tainted amount would not be permissible.
ED counsel Manisha Jagtap maintained that the assets attached, including multiple wind projects, were traceable to the 64 crore transferred from Videocon entities to NuPower and therefore represented tainted money whose value could be secured through equivalent property.
She relied on the findings of the Appellate Tribunal and submitted that, on the agency’s computation, the fair market value of a 25 MW project on the date of acquisition was around Rs 75.49 crore, and that the overall security obtained by the ED exceeded even the bank loans tied to the projects.
Senior advocates Vikram Nankani, for Kochhar, and Ravi Kadam, for Axis Bank, argued that only the Shriram-origin wind project was acquired for the Rs 64 crore, while later projects were funded by equity and bank finance and could not be treated as proceeds of crime.
They contended that by relying on depreciated 2019 book values, the ED had treated a roughly Rs 500-crore portfolio as if it had shrunk to Rs 200 crore and then swept in more properties to match the alleged tainted amount, creating a disproportionate attachment beyond statutory limits under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
The bench reiterated that the ED is entitled to secure assets to cover the alleged Rs 64-crore proceeds of crime but must act within the parameters of the statute and cannot attach unrelated third-party-funded assets or ignore the presence of secured creditors such as Axis Bank.
– Ends
Published By:
Sayan Ganguly
Published On:
Dec 25, 2025
