Gautam Khaitan & Anr. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court considered the challenge by Gautam Khaitan and another to the Delhi High Court order dated 15.11.2025 and found no case warranting interference. The Special Leave Petition was accordingly dismissed, and all pending applications were disposed of.
The underlying proceedings arose from the Government’s acquisition of 12 AW-101 VVIP helicopters from Agusta Westland. According to the respondents, relaxation of the service-ceiling requirement from 6,000 metres to 4,500 metres allegedly enabled Agusta Westland to participate in the bidding process and involved illegal gratification and kickbacks. The Delhi High Court judgment records allegations concerning routing of funds through IDS India, IDS Tunisia and Aeromatrix Info Solution Ltd. (AISL). Following CBI FIR No. RC-217/2013/A0003 dated 12.03.2013, the Enforcement Directorate registered ECIR No. DLZO/15/2014/AD(VM) dated 03.07.2014 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). After a search and seizure operation on 22.09.2014, the ED issued a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) under Section 5 of the PMLA on 15.11.2014.
Read Delhi HC Judgment in this case: Delhi HC Upholds PMLA Provisional Attachment Without Prior Chargesheet
The learned Single Judge considered whether the PAO could be issued without a charge-sheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whether the authorised officer had material giving rise to a “reason to believe”, and whether prior notice and hearing were required. The Single Judge held that the omission of clause (b) of Section 5(1) by the Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Act, 2013 meant that a person need not necessarily have been charged with a scheduled offence before a PAO could be issued. The first proviso concerning a report under Section 173 CrPC applied to a person already charged, while the second proviso permitted attachment where its statutory conditions were satisfied.
