ED files PMLA complaint against Western Railway employee Prashant Baldevbhai Rabari
The ED's Ahmedabad office has filed a prosecution complaint under the PMLA against a Western Railway employee it accuses of holding assets of about Rs 2.58 crore beyond his known income.
Key points
- The ED's Ahmedabad office has filed a prosecution complaint under the PMLA against a Western Railway employee in a disproportionate-assets case.
- The ED alleges the employee amassed assets of about Rs 2.58 crore beyond his known income between 1 January 2017 and 2 February 2021.
- The ED had earlier attached property worth about Rs 2 crore; the complaint was filed before the PMLA court at Bhadra, Ahmedabad.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Prashant Baldevbhai Rabari, an employee of Western Railway, in a disproportionate-assets case, the agency said on 27 October 2026. The ED alleges that he acquired assets of about Rs 2.58 crore beyond his known sources of income. The complaint has been filed by the ED's Ahmedabad office before the PMLA court at Bhadra, Ahmedabad.
What Happened
According to the ED, its investigation began from an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in Gandhinagar under various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Those offences are "scheduled offences" under the PMLA, which means the ED can investigate whether money from them was laundered.
The ED alleges that, during his employment with Western Railway, the employee adopted corrupt practices and acquired movable and immovable properties disproportionate to his known income. It says the assets, worth about Rs 2.58 crore, were held in his name and his wife's name, and were acquired during a check period from 1 January 2017 to 2 February 2021. A check period is the span of time investigators examine when comparing a public servant's income with the assets acquired.
The ED said it had earlier issued a provisional attachment order on immovable properties worth Rs 2,00,44,981, which it alleges were acquired through direct use of illegal funds. It then filed the prosecution complaint, which is the PMLA equivalent of a chargesheet, before the PMLA court.
What It Means
The complaint is now before the PMLA court at Bhadra, Ahmedabad. A provisional attachment prevents the property from being sold or transferred while the case continues; under the PMLA it must be confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority.
These are allegations, not findings of guilt; the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty in court, and due process continues.
The ED's account describes a case built on an anti-corruption FIR against a railway employee. Anyone asked for a bribe by an official can report it to the state anti-corruption bureau; Oquilia's guide to every state's helpline is at https://www.oquilia.com/report-a-bribe.
This report describes enforcement actions and allegations on the public record, attributed to the officials cited. An order, FIR or chargesheet is not a conviction; parties are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Named in this report, or spotted an error? Corrections and responses: editor@oquilia.com. We correct errors promptly and record responses from named parties.
Sources & Citations
- Enforcement Directorate press release — Enforcement Directorate