T’puram: The enforcement directorate (ED) has provisionally attached immovable assets worth Rs 37.59 crore in connection with the alleged money laundering case linked to the BSNL Employees’ Co-operative Society in Thiruvananthapuram.The attached assets comprise around 120 immovable properties belonging to 16 accused persons, located across Thiruvananthapuram and Kollam districts. The ED has issued the provisional attachment order to the revenue authorities for further proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).According to the agency, it has so far uncovered alleged financial irregularities exceeding Rs 300 crore. The accused include former society president A R Gopinathan, former secretary Pradeep Kumar, clerk Rajeev, and several members of the society’s managing committee and staff. Gopinathan has since passed away.The central agency recently resumed its investigation to trace the proceeds of crime and identify properties allegedly acquired using funds siphoned off from the co-operative society. Officials said the provisional attachment was aimed at securing assets suspected to have been purchased with the proceeds of the alleged fraud until the investigation is completed.A departmental inquiry into the society’s functioning had earlier estimated the total fraud at around Rs 350 crore. Following the findings, authorities in May initiated revenue recovery proceedings and summoned the accused to present their explanations. However, depositors have alleged that recovery measures were delayed, allowing the accused time to approach the courts and seek legal relief.In all, 19 individuals, including the society’s president, secretary, board members and employees, have been named as accused in the case.According to the convener of BSNL Depositors’ Forum, N A Abraham, as many as 212 properties belonging to the accused in Thiruvananthapuram and Kollam, have already been legally attached by the department. He said auctioning these assets could help recover enough funds to repay at least half of the affected depositors but alleged that official proceedings were moving at an “unnecessarily slow pace.”
