Section 60 Reciprocal Attachment and Confiscation: Indian Orders Against Overseas Assets and Foreign Orders: Delhi Procedure and Defence Guide

Section 60 PMLA • Foreign Assets • Reciprocal Attachment • Confiscation • Asset Tracing

Section 60 is the property-enforcement counterpart of PMLA's international evidence machinery. It allows qualifying Indian attachment, freezing and property orders to be sent to a contracting State for execution and, in the reverse direction, allows foreign requests concerning allegedly tainted property in India to enter the Indian PMLA process. The difficult questions are not only “where is the asset?” but “whose property is it, how was it acquired, what foreign offence generated it, what Indian statutory process applies, what value is being measured, and what must be proved before confiscation?”

Research and professional guidance by

Current legal review: 19 August 2026

Direct Answer

Section 60 PMLA creates a reciprocal mechanism for enforcing property restraint and confiscation across borders.

If India already has a qualifying PMLA attachment, freezing, adjudicatory or Special Court property order and the asset is suspected to be in a contracting State, the PMLA Special Court may issue a letter of request asking the competent foreign court or authority to execute the Indian order.

In the reverse direction, if a contracting State asks India to attach, seize, freeze or confiscate property located in India and allegedly derived directly or indirectly from an offence under a corresponding foreign law, the request may be forwarded through the Central Government to the Director of Enforcement.

But the foreign request is not a self-executing confiscation decree in India.

Section 60(6) specifically applies PMLA's Indian attachment, adjudication, confiscation, vesting, survey, search and seizure provisions to the property.

Therefore the proper sequence is:

FOREIGN REQUEST → IDENTIFY PROPERTY → TRACE SOURCE/TITLE → APPLY PMLA PROCEDURE → HEAR AFFECTED INTERESTS → CONFISCATE OR RELEASE.

Likewise, an Indian order sent abroad does not itself seize foreign property. The requested State executes the request through its own legal system and the applicable treaty or reciprocal arrangement.

Quick Navigation

1. The two directions of Section 60
2. Indian orders against assets abroad
3. Foreign orders against assets in India
4. Corresponding foreign law
5. Tracing and identification
6. Why Section 60(6) matters
7. Foreign final finding and Section 60(2A)
8. Section 58A release
9. Section 58B
10. Competing ownership claims
11. Exchange-rate and valuation problems
12. Cross-border double counting
13. Banks, mortgagees and secured interests
14. Procedural safeguard audit
15. Outbound foreign-asset matrix
16. Incoming foreign-request matrix
17. Common errors
18. Frequently asked questions

Section 60 Has Two Completely Different Directions

Route	Originating Order	Property Location	Execution Mechanism
India → Abroad	Qualifying Indian PMLA property order	Contracting State	Special Court issues letter of request for foreign execution
Abroad → India	Foreign court/authority request concerning corresponding-law proceeds	India	Central Government may forward to Director; Indian PMLA machinery applies

The Central Rule

INDIAN ORDER ABROAD → FOREIGN EXECUTION REQUIRED.

FOREIGN ORDER IN INDIA → INDIAN PMLA EXECUTION REQUIRED.

Route One: India Has the Order, but the Asset Is Abroad

Section 60(1) operates only after a qualifying Indian property order exists.

The current statutory framework refers to:

• property attached under Section 5;
• property frozen under Section 17(1A);
• property covered by an order under Section 8;
• the qualifying Special Court property orders referred to in the subsection.

If such property is suspected to be in a contracting State, the Special Court may, on the application contemplated by the section, issue the international execution request.

Example

ED alleges that ₹8 crore proceeds were transferred from India into an overseas account and later used to purchase a foreign apartment.

Before seeking effective restraint abroad, the case should identify:

• the Indian order relied upon;
• the overseas asset;
• foreign registered owner;
• purchase date;
• purchase consideration;
• bank trail;
• beneficial ownership;
• requested country;
• contracting-State basis.

The Special Court's letter then asks the foreign competent authority to execute the Indian property order.

What India cannot do

Indian officers cannot treat foreign territory as if it were an Indian district and physically take possession merely by serving the PAO abroad.

Foreign execution remains sovereign execution.

Route Two: A Foreign State Wants Property in India Restrained

Section 60(2) addresses the reverse route.

A foreign court or authority in a contracting State may request:

• attachment;
• seizure;
• freezing;
• confiscation

of property in India alleged to be directly or indirectly derived or obtained from commission of an offence under a corresponding foreign law.

The request reaches the Central Government, which may forward it to the Director for execution under PMLA.

Do not confuse referral with adjudication

The Central Government forwarding the request does not itself decide:

• who owns the property;
• whether it represents foreign proceeds;
• whether an Indian co-owner has a lawful interest;
• whether the value alleged is correct;
• whether confiscation is ultimately warranted.

Those are substantive property questions within the Indian process.

The “Corresponding Law” Gate Must Be Identified

The incoming foreign request is not based on any overseas illegality whatsoever.

Section 60(2) specifically links the request to an offence under a corresponding foreign law.

PMLA defines corresponding law to cover foreign law corresponding to PMLA provisions or dealing with offences in that country corresponding to scheduled offences.

Prepare a legal correspondence table

Foreign Component	Indian Audit
Country	Is it a contracting State?
Foreign statute	Exact legislation?
Foreign offence	Exact section / ingredients?
Money-laundering finding?	Investigative allegation or judicial finding?
Corresponding-law basis	What is the PMLA bridge?
Underlying offence	What criminal conduct allegedly generated property?
Indian property	How is it connected?

“Foreign fraud” is not a complete Section 60 analysis. Identify the foreign law, offence, corresponding-law basis and property nexus.

Tracing and Identification: The Asset Must Be Connected, Not Merely Located

Chapter IX's tracing concept is broader than locating an address.

A proper trace considers:

• nature;
• source;
• movement;
• disposition;
• title;
• ownership.

Identification adds the evidentiary question:

CAN IT BE SHOWN THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS DERIVED FROM OR USED IN THE RELEVANT MONEY-LAUNDERING OFFENCE?

Cross-border tracing example

Foreign criminal proceeds: USD 500,000.

Transfer: Foreign Account A → Company B.

Then: Company B → Indian Account C.

Then: Indian Account C + lawful loan → Flat D.

The property audit should determine:

• what portion of Flat D's consideration came from C;
• whether C contained only alleged foreign proceeds;
• whether lawful funds were commingled;
• who paid the balance;
• whether title belongs solely to accused or jointly with another person;
• whether ED relies on direct proceeds or equivalent value.

Section 60(6): Why a Foreign Request Does Not Automatically Override Indian Procedure

Section 60(6) is one of the most important safeguards in Chapter IX.

It expressly applies the relevant PMLA provisions concerning:

• attachment;
• adjudication;
• confiscation;
• vesting;
• survey;
• search;
• seizure.

Therefore an incoming foreign request is integrated into India's statutory property-enforcement system.

Practical consequence

If an Indian property is restrained on the basis of an overseas request, counsel should obtain:

• foreign request;
• Central Government forwarding record, where available in the proceeding;
• Director's execution direction;
• Indian PAO/freezing/seizure material;
• Section 8 notice;
• relied-upon documents;
• ownership schedule;
• property valuation;
• adjudication order.

Appellate protection

Where the process produces an appealable Indian PMLA order, the ordinary PMLA appellate framework should be examined according to the particular order and stage.

Do not frame the challenge as:

“I must appeal the foreign order in the PMLA Tribunal.”

The immediate Indian challenge concerns the Indian order made in execution of the reciprocal request.

Section 60(2A): What Changes After a Final Foreign Money-Laundering Finding?

Section 60(2A) addresses a much stronger procedural posture than an investigative foreign request.

Where the foreign criminal case closes or trial concludes and the foreign criminal court finds that the offence of money-laundering under the corresponding foreign law was committed, the Director may seek execution of confiscation before the PMLA Special Court.

The subsection expressly requires:

NOTICE TO AFFECTED PERSONS.

The focus then becomes whether the property is:

• involved in money-laundering; or
• used for commission of that offence.

Why the notice matters

The affected person may have a materially different case from the foreign accused.

For example:

Foreign conviction: A.

Indian flat registered to: B.

B should be able to put forward the proprietary material relevant to B's interest, including:

• title;
• consideration;
• bank trail;
• acquisition chronology;
• mortgage;
• independent source;
• co-ownership;
• inheritance;
• other third-party interest.

Section 58A: Foreign Acquittal / Negative Finding Can Support Release

Chapter IX is not written only for confiscation.

Section 58A addresses the opposite situation.

If the foreign criminal proceeding concludes and the foreign court finds:

• money-laundering did not take place; or
• the property in India was not involved in money-laundering,

the concerned person or Director can move the Special Court.

After notice to the other side, the Court may order release to the person entitled to receive the property.

Practical point: where the foreign foundation has collapsed, the Indian property owner should examine Section 58A rather than assume ED will automatically release the asset without an application.

Section 58B: What If the Foreign Trial Cannot Be Completed?

A foreign proceeding may become incapable of normal completion because:

• the accused dies;
• the accused is declared a proclaimed offender;
• another legal obstacle prevents trial;
• trial starts but cannot conclude.

Section 58B enables a contracting State to request confiscation or release in that situation.

The Central Government forwards the qualifying request to the Director, who moves the Special Court.

The Court then determines the property issue.

NO COMPLETED FOREIGN TRIAL
≠
AUTOMATIC CONFISCATION

AND

NO COMPLETED FOREIGN TRIAL
≠
AUTOMATIC RELEASE

Competing Ownership Claims: A Foreign Case Against One Person Cannot Replace Indian Title Analysis

Cross-border cases commonly involve property held by someone other than the foreign accused.

Common claimants

• spouse;
• parents;
• children;
• company;
• business partner;
• trust;
• bank;
• mortgagee;
• secured creditor;
• bona fide purchaser;
• legal heir;
• co-owner.

Four-question ownership test

Question	Evidence
Who holds legal title?	Sale deed, share register, demat record, registry extract.
Who funded acquisition?	Bank entries, loan, salary/business income, remittances.
Who actually controls it?	Possession, mandate, beneficial-owner records, corporate documents.
What is the alleged criminal nexus?	Foreign money trail, transfer chronology, corresponding-law material.

Registered title is important but not always the end of beneficial-ownership analysis.

Equally, a prosecution allegation of beneficial control cannot be substituted for evidence merely because the registered owner is related to the accused.

Foreign Currency and Valuation: There Is No Single Section 60 Conversion Date

Section 60 does not prescribe one universal foreign-exchange date for all cross-border property calculations.

That means the prosecution calculation should disclose its methodology.

Possible valuation dates

Date	Potential Relevance
Proceeds generated	Original criminal corpus
Foreign conversion	Actual conversion transaction
Property purchase	Purchase consideration / funding
Foreign restraint	Foreign property order
Indian attachment	Value stated in Indian PAO
Adjudication	Current property schedule / valuation
Confiscation	Final proprietary consequence
Disposal	Actual realisation, where relevant

Defence valuation audit

Ask:

• What foreign-currency figure is alleged?
• Which rate was used?
• What date?
• What rate source?
• Is ED measuring the original corpus or current asset value?
• Was appreciation treated as separate POC without legal analysis?
• Was a loan component excluded?
• Were lawful co-owner contributions separated?

Do not create a false universal FX rule. First identify the legal proposition being valued; then test the appropriate date and methodology for that proposition.

Cross-Border Double Counting: One Corpus Can Appear in Several Countries

Suppose:

USD 1 million leaves Country A.

It reaches Company B in Country B.

It is transferred to an Indian account.

The Indian account purchases property.

The same original corpus appears at four stages.

Those stages may establish tracing and later laundering activity.

They do not automatically prove:

USD 4 MILLION OF PROCEEDS.

Build a corpus-continuity table

Stage	Amount	Fresh Generation or Movement?
Foreign criminal receipt	___	Generation?
Company transfer	___	Movement?
Indian credit	___	Movement?
Asset purchase	___	Conversion into property?

The prosecution should separately explain any genuinely additional criminally generated value.

Banks, Mortgagees and Secured Interests

A foreign request may target property subject to a pre-existing bank charge or mortgage in India.

The property analysis should identify:

• mortgage date;
• loan disbursement;
• outstanding balance;
• security creation;
• bank's knowledge, if relevant;
• priority and statutory rights;
• whether the purchase itself was partly financed through lawful secured borrowing.

The mere fact that a property is named in a foreign confiscation request does not make third-party interests analytically irrelevant.

Nor should one assume that every secured interest automatically defeats PMLA.

The competing statutory and factual claims must be determined on the applicable law and chronology.

Procedural Safeguard Audit Before a Foreign Allegation Affects Indian Property

1. VERIFY CONTRACTING-STATE STATUS
What treaty or reciprocal arrangement applies? 2. VERIFY FOREIGN AUTHORITY
Was the request issued by a competent court/authority? 3. IDENTIFY CORRESPONDING LAW
What foreign offence legally connects with PMLA? 4. OBTAIN THE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Address, account, folio, shares, vehicle, asset identifier. 5. TRACE THE PROPERTY
Source, movement, acquisition, title and current disposition. 6. IDENTIFY ALL AFFECTED OWNERS / INTEREST HOLDERS 7. AUDIT INDIAN ATTACHMENT / FREEZING / SEIZURE POWER 8. INSIST UPON THE SECTION 8 PROPERTY-SPECIFIC CASE 9. AUDIT VALUATION / EXCHANGE RATE 10. TRACK THE FOREIGN CASE OUTCOME
Pending / conviction / acquittal / closure / incapable of conclusion. 11. APPLY SECTION 58A, 58B OR 60(2A) AS APPROPRIATE 12. PRESERVE APPELLATE REMEDIES AGAINST THE INDIAN ORDER

India → Overseas Asset: Section 60 Outbound Matrix

Field	Entry
Indian ECIR / proceeding	___
Indian property order relied upon	Section 5 / 17 / 8 / Special Court
Date of order	___
Contracting State	___
Foreign asset type	___
Foreign registered owner	___
Beneficial owner alleged	___
Asset identifier	___
Acquisition date	___
Purchase value / currency	___
POC nexus	___
Special Court application	___
Letter of request	___
Central Government dispatch	___
Foreign authority receipt	___
Foreign execution status	___
Third-party claim abroad	___

Foreign State → Indian Property: Section 60 Incoming Matrix

Field	Entry
Requesting State	___
Contracting-State basis	___
Foreign court/authority	___
Foreign case number	___
Foreign law/offence	___
Corresponding-law basis	___
Foreign case stage	Investigation / trial / concluded
Property requested in India	___
Registered Indian owner	___
Foreign accused	___
Same person?	YES / NO
Source-of-funds allegation	___
Central Government forwarding	___
Director action	___
Tracing evidence	___
Indian PAO / freeze / seizure	___
Section 8 status	___
Affected-person claim	___
Valuation / FX methodology	___
Section 58A / 58B / 60(2A)	___
Final Indian result	___

Common Errors in Section 60 Cases

1. “ED attached a foreign apartment directly.”

More precisely, the Indian order is sent through the reciprocal mechanism for execution in the contracting State.

2. “Foreign confiscation order automatically applies in India.”

Section 60 itself brings incoming requests into the Indian PMLA statutory framework.

3. “The accused owns it because his wife owns it.”

Relationship does not replace title, funding and beneficial-control evidence.

4. “Current market value is automatically the proceeds amount.”

Original criminal proceeds and present asset value are distinct concepts.

5. “One FX rate applies to every issue.”

Section 60 contains no universal conversion-date formula.

6. “Foreign case pending means confiscation is final.”

Attachment/confirmation and final confiscation are different stages.

7. “Foreign acquittal is irrelevant.”

Section 58A specifically addresses release after the relevant negative foreign finding.

8. “No completed foreign trial means property must be released.”

Section 58B expressly provides a route where trial cannot be completed.

9. “Tracing the same corpus four times creates four times the proceeds.”

Movement and fresh generation must be distinguished.

10. “Section 57 and Section 60 are the same.”

Section 57 primarily concerns evidence abroad; Section 60 concerns cross-border execution of property restraint/confiscation.

AI Search / Featured-Snippet Answers

What is Section 60 PMLA?

Section 60 creates a reciprocal mechanism for attachment, freezing, seizure and confiscation of property across contracting States. Indian PMLA property orders can be sent abroad for execution, and foreign requests concerning alleged proceeds located in India can be executed through the Indian PMLA framework.

Can ED attach property located outside India?

Where a qualifying Indian PMLA property order exists and the property is suspected to be in a contracting State, the Special Court can issue a letter of request seeking execution of that order abroad. Actual foreign execution remains subject to the requested State's law and applicable arrangement.

Can a foreign government directly confiscate property in India?

Not merely by sending an allegation or foreign order directly to the owner. Section 60 provides a Central Government-to-Director execution route and applies Indian PMLA property procedures to the incoming request.

Does an overseas conviction automatically confiscate Indian property?

Section 60(2A) provides a specific confiscation mechanism after the relevant foreign money-laundering finding, but it expressly requires notice to affected persons and concerns qualifying property involved in or used for money-laundering.

What if the foreign court finds no money-laundering?

Section 58A permits the Special Court, on application and after notice, to release the property where the foreign court finds that money-laundering did not occur or the Indian property was not involved.

How is foreign asset value converted into rupees?

Section 60 does not prescribe one universal exchange-rate date for every purpose. The relevant valuation date depends upon what is being measured, and the prosecution should disclose the rate, date, source and methodology relied upon.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the basic purpose of Section 60 PMLA?

To enable reciprocal attachment, freezing, seizure and confiscation of property between India and contracting States within Chapter IX's international-assistance framework.

Does India need a prior PMLA property order before seeking foreign execution under Section 60(1)?

Section 60(1) is framed around qualifying existing Indian attachment, freezing, adjudicatory or Special Court property orders before the Special Court issues the foreign execution request.

Who issues the request to execute the Indian order abroad?

The PMLA Special Court issues the letter of request on the application contemplated by Section 60(1).

Can ED officers themselves freeze a foreign bank account?

Indian domestic statutory powers do not by themselves confer coercive jurisdiction within another sovereign State. Foreign execution proceeds through the contracting-State mechanism.

What happens when a foreign attachment request reaches India?

The Central Government may forward the request to the Director for execution under PMLA. Tracing/identification and the applicable Indian attachment, adjudication and confiscation machinery then become relevant.

What is “corresponding law”?

PMLA defines it as foreign law corresponding to PMLA provisions or dealing with offences corresponding to scheduled offences. The exact foreign offence and Indian statutory bridge should be identified.

Can Indian property belonging to the spouse of a foreign accused be restrained?

The property may be investigated if the statutory nexus is alleged, but relationship alone does not prove ownership by the accused or criminal source. Title, funding, beneficial ownership and tracing should be examined.

Can a bank holding a mortgage challenge the property action?

Any relevant third-party proprietary or security interest should be documented and asserted through the procedure available at the particular PMLA stage. Its legal effect depends upon the facts and governing law.

What does Section 60(6) do?

It applies PMLA's domestic provisions concerning attachment, adjudication, confiscation, vesting, survey, search and seizure to property covered by an incoming foreign request.

What is Section 60(2A)?

It addresses execution of confiscation following the specified conclusion of a foreign criminal case in which the foreign court finds money-laundering under the corresponding law, with notice to affected persons before the Indian Special Court's confiscation order.

What is Section 58A?

It permits release where the foreign criminal case concludes with a finding that money-laundering did not occur or that the Indian property was not involved.

What is Section 58B?

It deals with a foreign request for confiscation or release where the foreign trial cannot be conducted or completed for the reasons specified by the provision.

Does a foreign restraint order prove the property is proceeds of crime?

No universal proposition of that breadth follows. The nature of the foreign order, corresponding-law material, tracing evidence and Indian statutory findings must be analysed.

How should a foreign property be valued?

Identify whether the question concerns original criminal proceeds, acquisition value, current market value, equivalent value, confiscation value or disposal value. The relevant methodology may differ.

Can ED count the same money repeatedly as it crosses borders?

Movement of the same corpus can be evidence of tracing or laundering conduct, but it should not automatically be treated as fresh generation of proceeds at each transfer.

What happens after property in India is finally confiscated on a foreign request?

Section 60(7) allows the Central Government, in the circumstances specified, either to return the confiscated property to the requesting State or compensate that State through disposal on mutually agreed terms, with reasonable specified expenses taken into account.

What is the strongest defence question in an incoming Section 60 case?

“Show how this specific Indian property is traced to the foreign corresponding-law offence, who actually owns and funded it, and which Indian PMLA procedure has been followed before restraining or confiscating it.”

Official Legal and Government Sources

• India Code — Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002
• Ministry of Home Affairs — International Cooperation / Mutual Legal Assistance
• Ministry of Home Affairs — Internal Security-II / Mutual Legal Assistance Guidelines

Related Detailed Research

• Foreign Remittances, Overseas Companies and Alleged Fund Layering: ED and PMLA Risks

Also connect this article after publication to:

Section 57: obtaining evidence abroad.

Section 60: restraining / confiscating property abroad or executing foreign property requests in India.

Section 66: ED sharing information with another Indian authority.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is general legal research and does not constitute case-specific advice. The execution of Indian property orders abroad and foreign property requests in India depends upon the precise PMLA order, contracting-State arrangement, corresponding foreign law, property location, ownership, source-of-funds evidence, tracing, local foreign law, Indian attachment/adjudication procedure, applicable appeals and current binding precedent. No universal exchange-rate or valuation date has been asserted because Section 60 does not itself prescribe one formula for every cross-border property issue. No outcome regarding attachment, freezing, release, confiscation or international execution is guaranteed.

Related Delhi legal guides

FEMA proceedings in Delhi · Black Money Act guide · Cross-border asset tracing

Document-first assessment

Start with the latest legal instrument and next deadline

Organise the current summons or order, case identifiers, a dated chronology and the transaction or property record before seeking case-specific advice.

Prepare for consultation