ED Attach Property Worth 85.20 Crore In Unity Infraprojects Limited Bank Fraud Case

How Did Alleged Diversion of Bank Funds Through Unity Infraprojects Subsidiaries Lead to Attachment of 14.51 Acres Worth 85.20 Crore in Kolkata?

The Enforcement Directorate has provisionally attached immovable property measuring approximately 14.51 acres and valued at 85.20 crore situated at Mouza Chakgaria in Kolkata in connection with its money laundering investigation into Unity Infraprojects Limited and associated entities. The land stands registered in the name of Suburban Agriculture Dairy and Fisheries Private Limited which the agency identifies as a step down subsidiary of Unity Infraprojects Limited through the intermediate wholly owned subsidiary Unity Realty and Developers Limited.

The attachment order under Section 5 1 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 aims to prevent transfer alienation or disposal of the property pending further proceedings. With this action the total value of movable and immovable assets attached or frozen in the matter has reached approximately 1609 crore. The underlying allegations centre on credit facilities of around 3200 crore principal obtained from a consortium of 23 banks with total reported dues including interest standing at approximately 3800 crore.

How precisely did funds said to have originated from those facilities travel through successive corporate layers to acquire or hold this specific parcel of land and what exact trail of bank records ledgers and conveyance documents establishes each link in that chain.

Unity Infraprojects Limited operates as a Mumbai based infrastructure construction company incorporated in 1979 and historically promoted by K K Avarsekar and associates. Its stated business areas covered buildings and housing transportation water supply and irrigation projects. Such contractors commonly rely on substantial working capital facilities including fund based cash credit non fund based letters of credit and bank guarantees as well as project linked finance.

The central question in the present investigation concerns whether facilities obtained for these purposes were utilised in manners inconsistent with their sanctioned objects and whether subsequent movements of funds generated assets that investigators now treat as connected to the alleged scheduled offences. The Enforcement Directorate states that funds received by Unity Infraprojects Limited were transferred through its wholly owned subsidiary Unity Realty and Developers Limited and thereafter used to acquire and hold assets through associated companies.

Suburban Agriculture Dairy and Fisheries Private Limited is identified as the step down entity holding the Chakgaria land. Each transfer between these entities requires precise mapping of inter company loans advances investments board approvals accounting entries and commercial rationale if any. Without the full set of bank statements journal entries and underlying agreements the precise character of every rupee remains subject to further verification.

The investigation itself originates from an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation Bank Securities and Fraud Branch Mumbai on a complaint lodged by the State Bank of India. Contemporary reporting in September 2023 described the FIR as naming Kishore Krishnarao Avarsekar described as chairman managing director and promoter Abhijit Avarsekar described as vice chairman and promoter Ashish Kishore Avarsekar described as executive director and promoter Pushpa Kishore Avarsekar described as whole time director and promoter together with Unity Infraprojects Limited and five other entities described as corporate guarantors or connected companies.

The reported exposure in that coverage stood at 3847.58 crore. The Enforcement Directorate release of October 2026 rounds the principal to 3200 crore and total dues including interest to 3800 crore while stating the consortium size as 23 banks. The difference of approximately 47.58 crore between the earlier precise figure and the later rounded total invites examination of calculation dates interest accruals or accounting adjustments. The complaint referred to a forensic audit conducted by BDO India LLP with reports submitted on 25 September 2019.

The account is reported to have become a non performing asset on 24 June 2014 and to have been classified as fraud by the bank fraud identification committee on 8 November 2019. An NPA classification records that repayment thresholds were crossed. A bank fraud classification records an internal determination. Neither constitutes a judicial finding.

The timeline from the reported NPA date in 2014 through the forensic report in 2019 the public reporting of the CBI FIR in September 2023 the Enforcement Directorate searches in July 2025 the filing of the prosecution complaint on 27 March 2026 and the latest attachment announced on 23 October 2026 spans more than twelve years. What specific findings in the forensic audit quantified the alleged fictitious letter of credit trade model improper adjustment entries diversion through non consortium accounts and related parties and unexplained excess payouts and how were those findings tested against primary bank records.

The alleged modus operandi as described by the Enforcement Directorate comprises fictitious transactions round tripping of funds manipulation of financial records and diversion through shell or dummy companies. Earlier reporting on the CBI FIR supplied additional detail regarding an allegedly fraudulent letter of credit trade model. A letter of credit functions as a banking instrument facilitating trade payments. Where the underlying commercial activity is alleged to be non existent the instrument itself becomes a potential vehicle for obtaining or moving funds without corresponding goods or services.

Investigators would ordinarily examine each letter of credit the named counterparties invoices shipping or delivery records and the ultimate disposition of the funds released. The subsequent stage involves routing through accounts outside the consortium and through related parties. The Enforcement Directorate specifically identifies Unity Realty and Developers Limited as a channel. Transactions across multiple companies can obscure origin and destination unless every bank statement is reconciled with the accounting ledgers of each entity and with the commercial documents that purport to justify the movement.

Round tripping in this context would involve funds leaving one entity and returning either directly or after intermediate steps so as to create an appearance of legitimate turnover investment or repayment. Establishing such a pattern requires a complete transaction by transaction trail. Manipulation of books would involve improper adjustment entries that conceal the true nature of transactions or make diverted amounts appear commercially justified.

Original ledgers audit working papers bank reconciliations and supporting invoices form the necessary evidence. Finally the acquisition or holding of assets through associated entities closes the alleged circle. The Enforcement Directorate states that its investigation established a trail linking the Chakgaria land to funds originating from Unity Infraprojects Limited and group entities. The provisional attachment therefore rests on that asserted connection.

The property itself comprises approximately 14.51 acres or roughly 58679 square metres or approximately 631000 square feet located at Mouza Chakgaria Kolkata West Bengal. The reported valuation of 85.20 crore yields an approximate per acre figure of 5.87 crore. These area conversions and unit values derive mathematically from the figures stated by the agency and do not constitute an independent market appraisal. The named holder is Suburban Agriculture Dairy and Fisheries Private Limited.

The attachment order under Section 5 1 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is provisional in character. Its stated purpose is to preserve the asset against dealings that could frustrate later confiscation proceedings. Provisional attachment does not equate to sale realisation recovery or distribution of proceeds to the consortium banks. Even if the order is later confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority the ultimate outcome depends on adjudication criminal proceedings competing claims actual market value at the time of any authorised disposal and the legal priority applicable to any recovery.

The Enforcement Directorate release does not disclose the registered conveyance deed the date of acquisition the precise consideration paid the source of each material payment the cadastral identifiers the land use classification any encumbrances or the valuation methodology employed. Each of those particulars remains essential for a complete asset level assessment.

Earlier enforcement actions form the bulk of the cumulative 1609 crore figure. In July 2025 the agency conducted searches at residential and commercial premises and bank lockers linked to Unity Infraprojects Limited its former directors and their family members. Movable assets valued at 31.21 crore were seized or frozen. The release does not itemise those assets into cash jewellery securities bank deposits or other categories. Seizure and freezing carry distinct legal consequences depending on the nature of the asset.

Separately three provisional attachment orders covering land and flats valued at approximately 1493 crore were issued and subsequently confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Confirmation places those earlier orders on a stronger procedural footing than a fresh provisional attachment yet still falls short of final confiscation. Adding the latest 85.20 crore attachment produces the reported aggregate of approximately 1609 crore. On a purely arithmetic comparison 1609 crore represents roughly 42.3 percent of the alleged total dues of 3800 crore.

That percentage compares an asset valuation figure with a liability figure. It is not a recovery rate. Assets may face valuation changes competing claims or legal challenges and may not ultimately be liquidated or distributed to the lenders. The distinction between identified assets seized or frozen assets provisionally attached property confirmed attachment confiscated property realised recovery and actual repayment to a creditor remains fundamental throughout.

The Enforcement Directorate filed its prosecution complaint on 27 March 2026 before the Designated Special Court City Civil and Sessions Court Greater Bombay Mumbai. Further investigation is stated to remain in progress. A prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act places the money laundering case before the competent Special Court. It is distinct from the original CBI FIR which addresses the alleged underlying bank fraud and associated offences.

The Enforcement Directorate release does not disclose whether the Special Court has taken cognisance whether charges have been framed or the current stage of any trial. Nor does it update the complete procedural status of the CBI proceedings or indicate whether any attached assets have been sold with proceeds distributed. These gaps leave open questions about the precise legal position of every named individual and every entity in the corporate chain.

The consortium banks face reported outstanding exposure of approximately 3800 crore. Attachment preserves potential sources of recovery but does not establish that any portion has been realised and returned. Unity Infraprojects Limited and its associated companies face an ongoing investigation into the alleged fictitious transactions manipulation of records and diversion of funds. The legal consequences for each entity will depend on the evidence eventually tested in the relevant proceedings.

Promoters and directors named in the earlier CBI reporting occupy positions that place them within the historical narrative of the case yet individual liability remains a matter for determination on the basis of specific allegations and proof. Suburban Agriculture Dairy and Fisheries Private Limited holds the newly attached land and therefore stands directly affected by the provisional order.

Ownership of the land by a step down subsidiary does not by itself establish that every activity of that company was unlawful. Other creditors employees contractors and commercial counterparties may experience commercial consequences from prolonged uncertainty and restrictions on assets yet the Enforcement Directorate release does not quantify any such specific impacts.

The sequence of dates from the reported non performing asset classification on 24 June 2014 the forensic audit submission on 25 September 2019 the bank fraud classification on 8 November 2019 the public reporting of the CBI FIR in September 2023 the July 2025 searches the prosecution complaint on 27 March 2026 and the latest attachment on 23 October 2026 frames a prolonged investigative arc. Each stage raises questions about the completeness of the transaction trail the commercial substance of inter company movements and the ultimate destination of funds drawn from the consortium facilities.

The latest attachment of the Chakgaria land valued at 85.20 crore adds one more identifiable immovable asset to the cumulative total of approximately 1609 crore while the broader allegations of diversion through Unity Realty and Developers Limited and associated entities continue to require precise mapping of every material transfer. The case remains under investigation with the provisional character of the newest order underscoring that further procedural steps before the Adjudicating Authority and the Special Court lie ahead.