ED attaches ₹35.52 crore assets in Indore bank fraud case
Synopsis
The ED has frozen ₹35.52 crore in properties belonging to the directors of Dhanlaxmi Solvex Pvt. Ltd., accused of laundering the proceeds of a ₹356.31 crore bank fraud through shell companies, circular trading, and misused Letters of Credit. With searches already conducted across five locations, further attachments are expected — making this one of the larger PMLA actions in Madhya Pradesh's industrial belt.
Key Takeaways
The ED's Indore sub-zonal office has provisionally attached 19 immovable properties worth ₹35.52 crore under the PMLA, 2002 .
The properties — residential flats and land parcels — are located in Indore and Shajapur districts of Madhya Pradesh .
The probe centres on M/s Dhanlaxmi Solvex Pvt.
Ltd. (DSPL) , whose promoters allegedly defrauded a bank consortium of ₹356.31 crore .
The lending consortium is led by State Bank of India , along with Union Bank of India , Bank of Maharashtra , and Bank of Baroda .
ED searches at five locations in Indore and Dewas were conducted on 26 February 2026 , yielding documents and digital evidence.
Further attachments and legal actions are expected as the investigation continues.
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), operating through its Indore sub-zonal office, has provisionally attached 19 immovable properties worth ₹35.52 crore in connection with a money laundering probe involving M/s Dhanlaxmi Solvex Pvt. Ltd. (DSPL), its directors, and linked entities. The action, carried out under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, targets assets held in the names of the accused in Indore and Shajapur districts of Madhya Pradesh.
Background: The Bank Fraud at the Centre of the Probe
The case originates from a complaint filed by a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India (SBI), along with Union Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, and Bank of Baroda. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had earlier registered an FIR alleging that the accused fraudulently availed credit facilities, causing a wrongful loss of ₹356.31 crore to the lending institutions. The ED's parallel investigation under PMLA subsequently uncovered what officials described as a sophisticated laundering operation.
How the Funds Were Allegedly Diverted
According to the ED, DSPL and its promoters allegedly obtained loans through misrepresentation and then routed the funds through a complex network of related entities. The probe reportedly uncovered large-scale circular trading, bogus transactions, accommodation entries, and the misuse of Letters of Credit (LCs). The proceeds of crime were allegedly laundered through multiple shell entities controlled by the accused and their associates.
Searches, Seizures, and the Attachment
On 26 February 2026, ED officials conducted searches at five locations across Indore and Dewas districts, invoking Section 17 of the PMLA. The searches yielded incriminating documents, digital devices, and financial records that reportedly strengthened the agency's case. Based on the evidence gathered, the ED has now attached 19 properties — comprising residential flats and land parcels — valued at ₹35.52 crore.
Impact of the Attachment
The provisional attachment effectively freezes the assets, preventing the accused from disposing of or transferring them. The move is aimed at safeguarding the alleged proceeds of crime and facilitating eventual restitution to the victim banks. Notably, this is the latest in a series of ED actions targeting industrial loan fraud in Madhya Pradesh, underscoring growing regulatory scrutiny of the state's corporate borrowing ecosystem.
What Comes Next
The ED has confirmed that its investigation is ongoing and that further attachments and legal actions are expected in the coming days. The case will now move through the adjudicating authority under PMLA before any final forfeiture can be ordered. The outcome will be closely watched by the consortium of lenders seeking recovery of the alleged ₹356.31 crore loss.
Point of View
But it represents barely a tenth of the alleged ₹356.31 crore loss — a ratio that reflects how difficult asset recovery remains in complex PMLA cases once funds have been routed through shell entities and circular trades. The use of Letters of Credit as a laundering vehicle is a recurring pattern in Indian industrial fraud, and the fact that the CBI FIR preceded the ED action suggests coordination between agencies is improving. The real test will be whether the eventual adjudication under PMLA results in actual restitution to the victim banks, or whether the attachment becomes another frozen statistic in a long-running case.
NationPress
23 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ED's action against Dhanlaxmi Solvex Pvt. Ltd. about?
The ED has provisionally attached 19 immovable properties worth ₹35.52 crore belonging to the directors of M/s Dhanlaxmi Solvex Pvt. Ltd. (DSPL) and associated entities under the PMLA, 2002. The action is part of a money laundering investigation linked to an alleged bank fraud of ₹356.31 crore.
Which banks were defrauded in the Dhanlaxmi Solvex case?
The victim consortium comprises State Bank of India (the lead bank), Union Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, and Bank of Baroda. The CBI had registered an FIR on the basis of their complaint alleging fraudulent availing of credit facilities.
How did the accused allegedly launder the money?
According to the ED, the accused obtained loans through misrepresentation and diverted the funds through a network of related shell entities. The probe uncovered circular trading, bogus transactions, accommodation entries, and misuse of Letters of Credit (LCs).
Where are the attached properties located?
The 19 attached properties — comprising residential flats and land parcels — are located in Indore and Shajapur districts of Madhya Pradesh. They are held in the names of the accused persons.
What happens next in the case?
The ED's investigation is ongoing, and further attachments and legal actions are expected. The provisional attachment will be reviewed by the adjudicating authority under PMLA before any final forfeiture order can be passed.
