Madras High Court Refuses To Interfere With Attachment Of PFI-Linked Organisation's Property Under UAPA

Though the parties argued that they were not associated with PFI, the bench of Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan and Justice R Poornima noted that the PFI had used the premises of the petitioner to conduct Dawa work. The court also noted that the organisation's pamphlet and PFI's pamphlets contained the same contact number. Thus, the court opined that the notification, banning PFI and its member associations, would apply to the petitioner association also and it would be termed an unlawful association.

“Further, it is revealed that PFI, through the institution of the second petitioner in Theni District, deputed its cadres to conduct Dawa work in Thanjavur District at several places. They were also involved in a murder case. Therefore, these statements clearly show that the petitioners are also associates of PFI and are affiliated with it. Further, on perusal of the pamphlets of the petitioners and PFI, it is revealed that both the pamphlets have the same contact number. Hence, the notification issued by the first respondent covers the petitioners as an unlawful association,” the court said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust and Arivagam, an organisation established by the trust to execute its objectives. The trust's properties were attached by the District Collector in September 2022, labelling it as one of PFI officers. Though this attachment was challenged before the District Court, the plea was dismissed against which the present plea was filed before the High Court.

The petitioners argued that to pass an order under Section 8 of UAPA, the organisation should first be declared as unlawful through a notification by the Central Government in the official gazette. In the present case, the petitioners argued that the central government's notification banning UAPA did not cover the petitioner's trust.

It was also argued that the Collector had no power to attach the property. The petitioners submitted that the Collector could only pass a prohibitory order and not an attachment order, as done in the present case. Thus, arguing that the action was impermissible, the petitioners sought to set aside the order.

The NIA submitted that the petitioners were affiliates of PFI and the witnesses have deposed about the petitioners involvement in activities of PFI. It was also argued that the prohibition order under Section 8 is nothing but an order for attachment of property. Thus, it was argued that the petitioner's plea was rightly rejected by the District Court.

After perusing the materials before it, the court was convinced that the petitioners were associated with PFI and thus would be covered under the notification by the Union Government. The court also agreed with the NIA and noted that the Collector had passed a prohibitory order which fell within the purview of Section 8 of UAPA.

Thus, finding that there was no infirmity in the order of the District Court upholding the attachment order, the court dismissed the appeal.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. C. M. Arumugam

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. K. Govindarajan Deputy Solicitor General of India, Mr. R. Baskaran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. D. Ghandiraj Special Government Pleader

Case Title: Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust and another v. Government of India

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 89

Case No: W.P(Crl) MD.No.1796 of 2025

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment