Emails seal Lucent drugs case as tribunal upholds ₹5.4cr ED attachment | Hyderabad News

Hyderabad: The Appellate Tribunal under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act (SAFEMA) has upheld the Enforcement Directorate’s attachment of property worth Rs 5.46 crore belonging to Lucent Drugs Pvt Ltd, holding that company records and emails indicated it knowingly routed tramadol consignments to Pakistan through overseas intermediaries without the required regulatory approvals.Dismissing Lucent Drugs’ appeal on Sept 28, chairperson Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari affirmed the adjudicating authority’s July 25, 2025, order, which had confirmed the ED’s provisional attachment issued on Feb 19, 2025. The appeal was filed against the deputy director of the ED’s Hyderabad unit.The money laundering case stems from an investigation by the Narcotics Control Bureau’s Bengaluru zonal unit. In a complaint filed before the additional district and sessions judge, Sangareddy, on May 13, 2022, the NCB named Lucent Drugs, its top management and others, alleging unauthorised exports of tramadol to Pakistan.The complaint also cited a discrepancy involving 3.85 kg of acetic anhydride, failure to submit mandatory quarterly returns, and non-maintenance of prescribed records. Based on the NCB case, the ED registered a money laundering case on Dec 29, 2023.While the original allegations related to around 25,000 kg of tramadol, the tribunal found evidence of 18,800 kg being routed to Pakistan, including 13,800 kg through Denmark-based CHR Olesen Pharmaceuticals and 5,000 kg through Malaysia-based SM Biomed.Lucent argued that all exports were backed by no-objection certificates issued by the Central Bureau of Narcotics for the declared destinations. It contended that exports to Pakistan during 2020 were authorised and that it could not be held responsible if overseas buyers later diverted the consignments.However, the ED relied on transaction records and email correspondence to argue that Pakistan was the intended destination from the outset. Rejecting Lucent’s defence, the tribunal cited emails suggesting the company was aware of the final destination of the shipments.A Nov 3, 2021, email sent on behalf of the company stated: “Don’t write PAKISTAN NAME IN PO. Please remove total matter in OTHER COLUMN REMARKS.” Other communications referred to prices agreed with Pakistan-based Inteq and approval of product labels by Alpha in Pakistan.Lucent also challenged the valuation of the attached property, arguing that it had been purchased for Rs 2.60 crore in Feb 2021 and was worth Rs 8.50 crore at the time of attachment, exceeding the alleged proceeds of crime. The company maintained that the property had not been acquired using illicit funds.The tribunal rejected the argument, holding that the relevant statutory provision required valuation based on the fair market value at the time of acquisition. While the ED assessed the property at Rs 6.02 crore, it restricted the attachment to Rs 5,46,58,871. Finding no reason to interfere with the adjudicating authority’s conclusions, the tribunal dismissed the appeal.