₹598-Crore Land Under Enforcement Radar: ED Strikes Ansal Group in Supreme Court–Monitored Gurugram Land Scam Probe

(Judicial Quest News Network)

Agra/Gurugram:26, February, 2026- In a major enforcement action with deep judicial and investigative ramifications, the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), HIU-II, has provisionally attached immovable properties worth over ₹598 crore in Agra, Uttar Pradesh, under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in connection with the high-profile land acquisition case involving Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. (APIL).

The attachment follows a detailed investigation initiated on the basis of an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), ACB, New Delhi, pursuant to the directions of the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 8977 of 2014. The FIR invoked serious penal provisions, including Sections 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against multiple public servants and private builders/colonizers, including APIL.

The Gurugram Land Matrix

The case traces its origins to large-scale irregularities in the acquisition and subsequent release of land in Sectors 58–63 and 65–67, Gurugram, Haryana.

The land had originally been notified for acquisition under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, ostensibly for public purposes such as development by HUDA and creation of a state land bank.

 However, the investigation revealed that substantial portions of this land were later released in favour of private colonizers through what agencies describe as a fraudulent and collusive process, striking at the very foundation of statutory safeguards governing public-purpose acquisitions.

According to the ED, this systematic manipulation compromised transparency in state action and converted a public acquisition process into a private profiteering mechanism.

Collusion, Contracts and Coercion

The PMLA probe further disclosed that APIL entered into collaboration agreements and obtained General Power of Attorneys (GPAs) from individual landowners for land already under acquisition notification. These agreements were allegedly riddled with serious legal and contractual infirmities, including:

• Absence of valid consideration prior to Section 4 notifications
• Lack of essential contractual terms
• Post-facto alterations in documents

Investigators found that once acquisition notifications were issued, the “notified status” of the land created uncertainty and fear, severely weakening the bargaining position of landowners.

In this coercive environment, land transfers were allegedly executed in favour of private colonizers at rates far below prevailing market value, resulting in wrongful gain to the company and corresponding financial loss to the landholders.

Licences, Colonies and Commercial Exploitation

On the strength of these arrangements, APIL was granted License Nos. 18/2010, 21/2011 and 26/2012 by the Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), Haryana, for developing residential plotted colonies over 142.306 acres in village Badshahpur, Gurugram. Of this, 42.751 acres of notified land was released from acquisition proceedings for grant of licences.

The land was subsequently developed into premium projects — “Esencia” and “Versalia” — and sold to third-party buyers. As the projects now stand fully developed and occupied, the original land has lost its physical identity, rendering direct attachment of the “proceeds of crime” legally and practically unfeasible.

₹598 Crore Attachment in Agra

To safeguard innocent homebuyers and avoid disruption to occupied residential projects, the ED has instead attached alternative immovable properties in multiple villages of Agra, Uttar Pradesh, valued at over ₹598 crore.

These properties are held in the names of associate companies and individuals allegedly acting on behalf of APIL.

The investigation has established that these entities functioned as “land-holding vehicles”, while funding, control and beneficial ownership remained vested with APIL—making them liable for attachment as substitute assets under PMLA provisions.

Judicially Anchored Investigation Continues

Officials stated that the action reflects the ED’s resolve to ensure that proceeds of unlawful activity do not escape the process of law, even when original assets have been monetised, transferred, or structurally transformed.

The investigation under the PMLA, 2002 remains ongoing, with further legal and enforcement action likely as financial trails and beneficiary structures are examined.

The case, rooted in Supreme Court directions and driven by inter-agency coordination, is emerging as one of the most significant judicially-monitored land and financial crime investigations, cutting across public office, corporate power, and systemic abuse of land acquisition laws.