New Delhi: A residential property in Uttam Nagar, southwest Delhi, belonging to an alleged drug trafficker, Pooja, has been attached after authorities found that it was allegedly acquired using proceeds linked to drug trafficking.Dwarka district police had moved a proposal to ministry of finance for attaching the property. The order stated that there was no dispute that the woman and her associate were arrested on April 12 and May 7, respectively, in connection with a case in which a commercial quantity of narcotic drugs was recovered. The investigating officer subsequently ordered the freezing of the property after recording reasons to believe that it had been illegally acquired from income derived from drug trafficking.During the proceedings, Pooja claimed that the Rs 11.5 lakh purchase price was arranged through her mother’s lifetime savings, financial assistance from her sisters and her own earnings.She claimed that her mother had been running a confectionery shop for 11 years and submitted a copy of the shop’s rent agreement. However, authorities noted that the agreement had been executed in 2013 for a period of only 11 months.She did not submit a current rent agreement, proof of registration of her mother’s business, documents showing the income earned by her and her family, bank statements reflecting regular income, or income-tax returns filed by her and her family members.Pooja further claimed that she had paid the entire purchase amount in cash. According to her submission, Rs 6 lakh was contributed by her mother, Rs 1.5 lakh came from her sisters, and the remaining Rs 4 lakh was her own accumulated savings from household and domestic caretaking and childcare work over the years.To support these claims, she submitted affidavits from her mother and sisters. However, authorities noted that the affidavits were prepared only on Aug 14 and were not supported by contemporaneous financial records. She also failed to provide bank statements of herself, her mother or her sisters showing withdrawals corresponding to the amounts allegedly used for purchasing the property.Authorities concluded that the claims regarding the source of funds were not supported by sufficient documentary evidence. In the absence of bank records, income-tax returns, business documents or proof of cash withdrawals, the source of the funds used to acquire the property remained unexplained.
