ED attaches more Adarsh Credit Society assets in Rs 3,830 crore PMLA case

What the Record Shows

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Jaipur, has provisionally attached movable and immovable properties worth about Rs 7.72 crore under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. Per the ED's press release dated 16 February 2026, the attachment was made on 12 February 2026 in the matter of M/s Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society Ltd and others. A provisional attachment is an investigation-stage step under the PMLA; it must be confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority and is not a finding of guilt or a conviction.

This latest order takes the total attachment in the case to approximately Rs 2,183.72 crore. Per the ED, properties worth about Rs 2,176 crore had already been attached through four earlier provisional attachment orders, and the fifth order of 12 February 2026 adds the further Rs 7.72 crore.

The agency states that its investigation began on the basis of first information reports registered by the Special Operations Group (SOG) of the Rajasthan Police. Per those FIRs, as summarised by the ED, the main accused Mukesh Modi and Rahul Modi colluded with a group of persons and associates who collected crores of rupees from the investors and members of the society. The ED has identified proceeds of crime in the matter at approximately Rs 3,830.06 crore, a figure it describes as an investigative finding rather than a judicially determined amount.

A prosecution complaint and a supplementary complaint have been filed before the Special Court (PMLA), Jaipur, against 139 accused persons and entities, and the court has taken cognizance. A chargesheet contains allegations, not findings of guilt, and every person and entity named is an accused presumed innocent unless a court convicts them.

How It Worked

The mechanism set out below is the ED's investigative account and the allegation contained in the predicate FIRs; it is pending trial and has not been established by any court. Per the ED, Mukesh Modi and other family members held control over the society and its funds. The agency alleges that they lured poor investors with the assurance of an abnormally high return on their investment, and that funds running to thousands of crores of rupees were collected on that basis.

According to the ED's investigation, the money collected from members was then diverted away from the purposes for which it was gathered. The agency alleges the diversion took several forms: unsecured loans; incentives and ex-gratia payments to family members of Mukesh Modi who were employed by the society; agency commission paid to a family firm; loss-share trading; and deployment into real estate and other businesses of the promoter, his family and their associates. Per the ED, these transfers resulted in wrongful loss to the investors and a corresponding wrongful gain for those said to have controlled the funds.

The ED alleges that Mukesh Modi, his family members, associates and their companies, firms and limited liability partnerships acquired proceeds of crime amounting to about Rs 3,830.06 crore, which the agency says were used to acquire movable and immovable properties. It is those acquired assets that the PMLA attachments have targeted, across five provisional attachment orders to date.

On the procedural side, the ED filed a prosecution complaint and a supplementary complaint before the Special Court (PMLA), Jaipur, against 139 accused persons and entities, and the court has taken cognizance of both. Taking cognizance is a procedural stage in the criminal process; it records that the court will proceed on the complaint, not that any accused has been found guilty. Further investigation, per the ED, is under progress.

Who Lost Money

The affected group is the membership and depositor base of a multi-state credit co-operative society, concentrated in Rajasthan and Gujarat. The ED describes them as poor investors who were drawn in with promises of an abnormally high return. Credit co-operative societies of this kind pool contributions from a large number of small members, so the individual sums are typically modest while the aggregate runs into thousands of crores.

The distinction that matters for members is between attachment and recovery. The roughly Rs 2,183.72 crore attached so far is the value of property the ED has frozen; it is not money that has been returned to depositors. Attached assets are held pending confirmation by the Adjudicating Authority and the outcome of the trial, after which a court-supervised process would determine how, and how much, is restored to those who lost money. That process, where it runs, is typically phased and rarely returns the full sum deposited.

Set against the ED's proceeds-of-crime estimate of about Rs 3,830.06 crore, the attached base of roughly Rs 2,183.72 crore indicates the gap between the sums the agency says were misused and the assets it has so far been able to trace and freeze. What members eventually receive depends on confirmation of the attachments and the disposal that follows.

Where It Stands Now

The case is at attachment and trial stage. The fifth provisional attachment order, dated 12 February 2026, is the most recent step, and the ED has said further investigation is under progress. Provisional attachments must be placed before the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA for confirmation within the statutory period; until confirmed, they are prima facie measures, not final determinations.

The criminal proceedings are before the Special Court (PMLA), Jaipur, which has taken cognizance of the prosecution complaint and the supplementary complaint against 139 accused persons and entities. No court has recorded any conviction in the matter. A provisional attachment, a chargesheet and the taking of cognizance are stages in the process, not findings of guilt; every individual and entity named by the ED, including Mukesh Modi and Rahul Modi, is an accused, presumed innocent unless and until a court convicts them, and due process continues.

Readers can follow comparable enforcement matters on Oquilia's enforcement news index, including the court-supervised restitution of Agri Gold properties to depositors and the return of funds to Rose Valley victims, both of which show how the attachment-to-restitution route works once a matter advances.

What It Means

The Adarsh matter illustrates how the PMLA is used against schemes that gather money through a co-operative structure. A registered credit co-operative society is meant to lend among its members, not to operate as an open deposit-taking business promising outsized returns; where the record alleges funds were routed to a promoter's family and unrelated businesses, that is the conduct the ED is pursuing. Provisional attachment lets the agency freeze traceable assets early, before a trial concludes, so that value survives for possible restoration.

For a member of any co-operative society or deposit scheme, the practical safeguards are the same. Verify what a society is registered to do and whether it is authorised to accept the money you are handing over, be wary of assured returns that are far above bank rates, and remember that a co-operative badge does not by itself make a high-return promise safe. A quick sense-check of whether a promised payout is even arithmetically plausible for the amount invested can be done with a tool such as Oquilia's lump-sum return calculator.

The broader lesson is patience and realism about recovery. Even a large attachment figure is not the same as money back in hand, and the journey from a provisional attachment to a distribution to depositors runs through confirmation, trial and disposal over a period of years.

FAQ

Does the ED's chargesheet mean the people named are guilty?

No. A provisional attachment, a prosecution complaint and the taking of cognizance are steps in the process, not findings of guilt. The Special Court (PMLA), Jaipur has taken cognizance but the trial is pending. Every person and entity named by the ED, including Mukesh Modi and Rahul Modi, is an accused, presumed innocent unless and until a court convicts them.

What exactly did the ED do on 12 February 2026?

Per the ED, it provisionally attached movable and immovable properties worth about Rs 7.72 crore under the PMLA in the Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society matter. It was the fifth such order and took the total attachment in the case to about Rs 2,183.72 crore. The attachment must still be confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority.

Has any money been returned to members?

No. The roughly Rs 2,183.72 crore represents attached property that has been frozen, not funds distributed to depositors. Any restoration would follow confirmation of the attachments and the outcome of the trial, through a court-supervised process that typically runs over years.

How much does the ED say was involved?

The ED has identified proceeds of crime of about Rs 3,830.06 crore in the matter and has attached property worth roughly Rs 2,183.72 crore across five provisional attachment orders. Both are the ED's investigative estimates and have not been determined by a court.

How can I check whether a society or scheme can legally take my deposit?

A co-operative credit society is registered under co-operative law to lend among its members, and a business accepting public deposits is separately regulated by the RBI and the Companies Act. You can verify what an entity is registered to do before depositing, and treat an assured, well-above-market return as a reason for caution rather than confidence.

This report is based on the press release of the Directorate of Enforcement dated 16 February 2026 on provisional attachment in the Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society matter, reviewed on 1 August 2026.