Bombay High Court Directs ED To Issue NOC For Society Redevelopment Despite PMLA Attachment Of One Flat

The Bombay High Court on 13 October directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to issue a No-Objection Certificate (NOC) to Antaral Co-operative Housing Society within six weeks for redevelopment of its building, subject to safeguards preserving the ED's rights over an attached flat.

A Division Bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Ashish S. Chavan allowed the Society's writ petition based on its undertaking dated 24 September 2026 to comply with the stipulated safeguards. The judges said:

“We direct the Enforcement Directorate to issue a No- Objection Certificate in favour of the Petitioner-society within a period of six (6) weeks from today. We also make it clear that No-Objection Certificate shall be subject to the compliance of the stipulations stated in the affidavit filed by the Petitioner- society,”

The case concerns Flat No. 4 in the Society's building, which is over 44 years old. The ED provisionally attached the flat on 28 February 2013 and confirmed the attachment on 27 August 2013. The Society sought an NOC after the ED rejected its request on 2 September 2025, citing the attachment. It argued that the attachment was preventing redevelopment of the building.

The Court observed that the Society's affidavit had largely addressed the ED's concerns. It clarified that the replacement flat allotted in lieu of Flat No. 4 would remain subject to the attachment. The Society would record the relevant details in the development agreement and Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement (PAAA).

It acknowledged the Society's bona fides, particularly its undertaking to deposit all rent, compensation and other monetary benefits arising from the attached flat exclusively into an account designated by the ED, without making any payment to the accused.

However, the Bench rejected the ED's suggestion that the Society furnish a bank guarantee before handing over the existing flat for demolition. It noted that only one flat in the building was attached and held that requiring a bank guarantee could impose an unnecessary financial burden on the Society, particularly since the developer had not yet been appointed and the redevelopment terms remained unsettled. It said:

“...we do not agree to the suggestion that a Bank guarantee shall be furnished by the Petitioner-society, as we must note that it is only one flat in the society which is under attachment and we do not intent to put the society under a financial pressure and particularly when the Developer and the terms of development are not yet finalised,”

Since proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were pending before the Special Court in Ranchi, the judges also directed the ED to place the Society's affidavit and the High Court's order before that Court to keep it informed about the redevelopment arrangements.

Accordingly, the High Court directed the ED to issue the NOC within six weeks, subject to the safeguards undertaken by the Society.

For Petitioner: Advocates Abhay Anturkar i/b Yatin Malvankar

For Respondents: Ashish Mehta, Special Retainer Counsel ED