The Madras High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) on a set of 39 appeals filed by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) minister Aadhav Arjuna’s wife, his father-in-law and lottery operator Santiago Martin, his mother-in-law, and several entities associated or operated by the Martin family, challenging the attachment of properties worth over ₹900 crore, in a money laundering case.
<figure class="art
The bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan directed ED special public prosecutor N Ramesh to accept notice on the appeals and connected interim applications seeking a stay on the attachment proceedings.
The appeals filed by Santiago Martin, his wife and All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) MLA Leema Rose, and his daughter, challenge an order of the Appellate Tribunal passed on May 30, 2025, under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which upheld ED’s provisional attachment order of June 9, 2023 and refused to interfere with an earlier adjudicating authority order confirming the attachment.
The batch of appeals also include those filed by several companies and firms linked to the Martin family.
Also Read:‘Lottery king’ Santiago Martin case: Supreme Court restrains ED from copying laptop, mobile data
ED had first registered an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against Martin and others in 2014, on the basis of a CBI chargesheet concerning an alleged loss of ₹910.29 crore to the Government of Sikkim.
According to ED, the loss arose from the sale of lottery tickets in Kerala through alleged manipulation or inflation of prize-winning tickets. Between 2016 and 2023, ED issued six provisional attachment orders covering properties worth ₹910.29 crore, which it described as proceeds of crime. In November 2023, the adjudicating authority confirmed the agency’s latest attachment order relating to assets worth ₹456.84 crore. The appellate tribunal subsequently dismissed challenges to that order.
In the appeals, Martin and the others have argued that ED’s case initially rested on the allegation that a partnership firm in which Martin and his co-accused N Jayamurugan were partners, generated unlawful gains of ₹910.29 crore by inflating prize-winning lottery ticket claims. ED had also claimed that Martin held a 51 percent share in the firm while Jayamurugan held the remaining 49 percent, and the alleged proceeds of crime were apportioned between them in that ratio.
The appeals claim that after attaching assets on that basis over several years, the ED changed its position in 2023 and claimed that Future Gaming and related entities owned or operated by the Martin family generated the entire proceeds of crime. ED used such theory to justify a fresh attachment of properties worth an additional ₹456.84 crore, the appeals claim.
Martin and the others have also argued in their appeals that at present, no surviving predicate offence exists because proceedings under the Lotteries (Regulation) Act could not continue without a complaint from the State of Sikkim. They have cited court findings in proceedings involving a co-accused, where an affidavit filed by the Sikkim government stated that it had not suffered any loss.
Martin has also alleged in his plea that ED exceeded its jurisdiction by investigating allegations that do not figure in the CBI chargesheet, denied him effective cross-examination and relied on a contradictory and incomplete factual record while securing confirmation of the attachment.
The high court will hear the appeals further in July this year.
