The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has provisionally attached assets valued at approximately Rs 22.7 crore in connection with a money-laundering investigation into an alleged fake government offices scam in Gujarat’s Dahod district. The attached assets include seven parcels of land, mutual fund investments and balances held in various bank accounts, according to the agency.
The action has been taken under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The investigation relates to allegations that government offices were fraudulently created and public funds were obtained for works that were either fictitious or never carried out.
Fake offices allegedly created in Dahod
According to the ED, the alleged scam began during 2020–21. The accused are suspected of establishing three fake government offices and obtaining grants amounting to Rs 11.7 crore for 52 works. The agency said the offices were used to process proposals and secure government funding under the guise of executing development and irrigation-related projects.
The probe later indicated that the alleged network had obtained approval for 121 fictitious works over a period of three years. The projects were reportedly presented as legitimate government works, enabling the accused and their associates to obtain funds from public authorities.
The agency has alleged that the accused acted in conspiracy with others and used forged documents, signatures and official records to create the appearance that the offices and projects were genuine. The funds were allegedly released on the basis of these documents.
The ED’s action follows a First Information Report registered in Dahod, Gujarat. The agency has identified Abubakar Jakir Saiy, along with his family members and associates, among those whose assets have been attached in the case. The investigation is continuing, and the allegations are yet to be tested before a court.
Money trail under investigation
The ED said the funds allegedly obtained through the fake offices were routed through a network of bank accounts. The money was subsequently used for acquiring properties, making investments and for other purposes, according to the agency.
The provisional attachment is intended to prevent the alleged proceeds of crime from being transferred, concealed or disposed of during the investigation. Under the PMLA framework, assets believed to represent proceeds of crime may be provisionally attached, subject to confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority and further proceedings before the appropriate court.
The properties and financial assets attached in this case comprise:
- Seven parcels of land.
- Investments in mutual funds.
- Balances held in different bank accounts.
- Other assets allegedly linked to the proceeds generated from the suspected fraud.
The ED has not stated that the attachment represents a final confiscation. A provisional attachment is an interim investigative measure and does not, by itself, establish the guilt of the persons concerned.
Allegations of forged approvals
The agency’s investigation centres on the alleged misuse of government procedures. The suspects are accused of presenting fake proposals and obtaining approvals for works that did not exist or were not executed as claimed.
The ED has alleged that government grants were fraudulently secured through fabricated records. The suspected offences reportedly involved the creation of false government offices, preparation of counterfeit documents and use of forged signatures to support applications for funding.
The investigation is also examining the role of individuals who may have assisted in preparing, processing or approving the allegedly fraudulent proposals. The agency is expected to trace the movement of funds, identify additional beneficiaries and determine whether more assets were purchased using the suspected proceeds.
Several people have previously been arrested or questioned in connection with allegations relating to fake government offices in Gujarat. However, the precise role of each accused and the extent of any administrative or official involvement will be determined through the ongoing criminal and money-laundering proceedings.
Broader Gujarat fraud investigations
The ED’s action in the Dahod case was announced alongside a separate attachment involving an alleged housing and real-estate fraud in Ahmedabad. In that investigation, the agency provisionally attached immovable properties valued at approximately Rs 129.8 crore.
The two actions together involved assets worth around Rs 152.5 crore, although they relate to separate investigations. The Ahmedabad case concerns allegations that homebuyers, small investors, traders and middle-class families were induced to invest in housing projects through promises of flats, commercial units and attractive returns.
According to the agency, some projects were marketed at pre-launch prices despite allegedly lacking required approvals. Buyers were reportedly promised delivery of properties and, in some cases, returns ranging from 54% to 100%. The ED alleged that several promised flats and shops were never delivered and that refunds were not made.
In one project in Chharodi, the agency said around 250 buyers and investors were allegedly misled with claims that approvals from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority and other authorities were “in progress”. The land associated with the project was later allegedly sold or transferred to other parties.
The agency has further alleged that sham sale agreements and fabricated payment details were used to give certain property transfers the appearance of legitimate transactions.
What happens next
The Rs 22.7 crore attachment in the fake government offices case remains subject to statutory and judicial review. The Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA will examine whether the attachment should be confirmed. The accused persons may challenge the action before the relevant legal forums.
The ED is expected to continue investigating the alleged source and movement of funds, the involvement of public officials or private intermediaries, and the ownership of other properties and financial assets.
The agency has also indicated that further investigation is underway. Additional arrests, seizures, freezing of bank accounts or attachment of assets may follow if investigators identify more proceeds of crime or beneficiaries.
The case highlights the risks associated with fraudulent use of government schemes and the role of financial investigation in tracing public funds allegedly diverted through forged records and fictitious projects. Until a court reaches a final decision, all allegations remain subject to due process, and the accused are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.