ED attaches ₹65.60 lakh assets of NFR engineer in Guwahati graft case
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Guwahati Zonal Office, has provisionally attached three immovable properties valued at approximately ₹65.60 lakh under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, in a disproportionate assets case against a senior Northeast Frontier Railway (NFR) official and his wife. The action was announced on Saturday, 9 May 2025.
Who Is Accused and What They Are Alleged to Have Done
The ED's action targets Hem Chandra Borah, Deputy Chief Engineer of the NFR, and his wife Gayatree Saikia, a government school teacher at Bhaskar Bidyapith Higher Secondary School in Guwahati. According to investigators, the couple allegedly accumulated assets grossly disproportionate to their known sources of income during the check period between 1 April 2016 and 17 January 2021.
The alleged disproportionate assets amounted to nearly ₹73.76 lakh, constituting approximately 86.88% of the couple's total legitimate income during the scrutiny period — a figure the ED describes as a significant and systematic accumulation of illicit wealth.
The CBI Connection and Legal Basis
The ED investigation was initiated on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Anti-Corruption Branch-I, New Delhi, against Borah under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Saikia was also named in the case under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI subsequently filed a chargesheet before the competent court on 25 March 2025.
How the Money Was Allegedly Laundered
A detailed analysis of the CBI chargesheet and independent enquiries conducted under the PMLA revealed an alleged systematic laundering method. Despite the couple operating seven bank accounts between them, their total ATM and UPI withdrawals amounted to only ₹1.36 lakh — indicating minimal use of banking channels for household expenditure, according to the ED.
Investigators allege that illicit cash received as gratification was used for day-to-day expenses, while legitimate salary income was retained in bank accounts and later channelled through cheque payments for the acquisition of immovable properties — an alleged attempt to project tainted proceeds as untainted assets. This approach, if proven, is a classic layering technique under PMLA jurisprudence, where illicit cash funds living costs while clean salary funds traceable property purchases.
What Happens Next
The provisional attachment of the three properties is a preventive measure under the PMLA and must be confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority within a stipulated timeframe. The ED has stated that further investigation in the case is ongoing. The case adds to a growing list of anti-corruption actions targeting railway and public sector officials in the Northeast region in recent years.