The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) provisional attachment of a luxury hotel in Goa in connection with the alleged liquor scam and money laundering case.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal held that the investigating agency had sufficient material to proceed with the attachment. The court directed the petitioners to present their case before the appropriate tribunal or competent authority.
The petition was filed by New Delhi-based Dr Rahul Agrawal and M/s Pacifica Hotels India Pvt Ltd, challenging the ED’s provisional attachment order dated May 28, 2026.
Westin Hotel Attached by ED
The property under attachment is the five-star The Westin Hotel in Anjuna, North Goa. The hotel has been valued at around ₹110 crore and was treated by the ED as property allegedly acquired from proceeds of crime.
The attachment followed an investigation into the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor syndicate and money laundering activities.
The petitioners had sought cancellation of the ED’s provisional attachment order, arguing that the money used in the hotel transaction came from legitimate business sources.
ED’s ₹110 Crore Money Trail Claim
According to the ED, around ₹110 crore in alleged illegal proceeds generated through the Chhattisgarh liquor syndicate was transferred in cash to Vijay Kumar Agrawal, a resident of Durg and the uncle of Rahul Agrawal.
The agency alleged that the money was subsequently used by Rahul Agrawal to acquire the Westin hotel in Goa.
The hotel transaction was reportedly carried out with M/s Sir Biotech India Ltd. According to the ED, ₹50 crore was paid through banking channels under the registered sale deed, while another ₹60 crore was allegedly paid in cash.
Petitioners Dispute ED Allegations
The petitioners told the High Court that the ₹60 crore cash component used in the transaction represented legitimate business income.
They relied on orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and argued that the Income Tax Department had examined the source of the money and treated it as legitimate business cash rather than undisclosed income.
The petitioners also submitted that Vijay Agrawal had resigned as a company director under a family settlement dated May 1, 2019. According to their argument, he had no subsequent connection with the hotel project.
They further claimed that Vijay Agrawal had never been directly or indirectly associated with the Chhattisgarh liquor business and was not named as an accused in the original FIR or charge sheet.
ED Cites Statements in Investigation
The ED told the court that its investigation had established a money trail through statements recorded from alleged cash distributors in the liquor syndicate.
The agency referred to statements by Lakshmi Narayan alias Pappu Bansal and Prabir Kumar Sharma, who allegedly provided information about ₹110 crore being delivered in cash to Vijay Agrawal.
The ED also cited a statement recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), in which it alleged that Rahul Agrawal acknowledged receiving ₹60 crore in cash in eight to ten instalments at his residence in New Friends Colony, Delhi.
The agency further claimed that Vishal Saxena, who allegedly collected cash on behalf of the seller, was subsequently appointed as a director of the hotel company. The ED described this as an indication of the alleged “integration” stage of money laundering.
Court Rejects Tax Argument
The High Court observed that the Income Tax Department treating a particular cash amount as accounted for for taxation purposes does not automatically exclude that money from scrutiny under the PMLA.
The court noted that tax laws and the PMLA operate under different objectives, scopes and legal standards. Therefore, an assessment under income-tax proceedings could not by itself prevent an investigation into whether the money represented proceeds of crime under the money-laundering law.
Hotel Continues Normal Operations
The court also noted that the provisional attachment had not stopped the hotel from operating.
According to the order, the hotel continues to function normally, with no rooms having been shut and no employees having been removed because of the attachment.
The division bench dismissed the petition while allowing the petitioners to raise their contentions before the appropriate tribunal or competent authority.
The ruling comes amid continuing investigations into the alleged Chhattisgarh liquor scam and related money-laundering proceedings.
---copy---copy1.jpg)
