DK Media
In India’s ever-evolving legal and economic landscape, private enterprise plays a dual role: as an engine of growth and, at times, a subject of regulatory scrutiny. Yet amidst allegations, investigations, and courtroom drama, a quieter truth often gets lost in translation: companies don’t just build wealth, they build nations. When scrutiny rises, it becomes essential to strike a balance between upholding the rule of law and acknowledging a company’s socio-economic contribution.
The recent legal saga surrounding M3M India Pvt. Ltd. has reignited this conversation. Accused under the stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), M3M found itself in the crosshairs of the Enforcement Directorate. However, a key development, the Supreme Court’s July 2025 decision permitting substitution of a provisionally attached property, offers an important reminder: justice doesn’t begin and end in the courtroom. It unfolds in communities, cities, and the very infrastructures we live and work in.
Law, Not at the Cost of Livelihood
The PMLA equips the ED with extensive powers to attach assets suspected to be linked to illicit gains. This is an indispensable tool in the fight against financial crime. But its execution, especially in industries like real estate, often triggers collateral consequences: halted construction, abandoned infrastructure, broken supply chains, and, most critically, job losses.
M3M’s case illustrates this friction well. The company offered to substitute a ₹317 crore land parcel provisionally attached under the PMLA with fully constructed commercial units of equivalent value. In doing so, it not only respected the ED’s authority but also sought to preserve the viability of ongoing projects. The Supreme Court, in permitting the substitution, walked a fine legal line, preserving enforcement without freezing enterprise. This kind of legal nuance often demands the insight and advocacy of experienced ED lawyers, who understand both enforcement dynamics and the socio-economic ripple effects of such actions.
Employment as a Legal Consideration?
Though the Court’s order did not explicitly cite employment as a determining factor, the implications were clear. As reported in Outlook India and Financial Express, M3M’s infrastructure activities have allegedly led to the creation of over 1 lakh jobs and positively impacted over 5 lakh lives. The construction and delivery of residential and commercial projects aren’t abstract economic inputs, they shape real livelihoods, especially across Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities.
In this light, a legal question arises: should employment impact be weighed in enforcement decisions? In global jurisdictions, courts and regulatory bodies are beginning to factor in “public interest harm” caused by abrupt enforcement measures, particularly in heavily labour-dependent sectors.
India’s legal system, while rightly focused on accountability, is also inching toward this nuanced perspective, evident in how the Supreme Court used discretion to allow substitution in the M3M case. The ruling creates no precedent in doctrine, but certainly one in direction.
Nation-Building in the Crosshairs
India’s real estate industry does more than construct buildings. It contributes to housing security, regional development, infrastructure connectivity, and MSME stimulation through supply chains. When legal scrutiny halts these pipelines entirely, the nation-building function of enterprise suffers.
This doesn’t suggest immunity for corporate wrongdoing, only that enforcement should be proportionate, calibrated, and considerate of wider socio-economic effects. Real estate is unique in that its projects are slow, multi-stakeholder, and hyperlocal. A single provisional attachment can disrupt entire townships, delay affordable housing projects, and displace labourers midstream.
Can the Law Accommodate Economic Continuity?
The current silence in the PMLA regarding asset substitution creates a grey area. While the Act doesn’t explicitly allow it, it also doesn’t disallow it. The M3M ruling demonstrates how courts can use their inherent powers to fill that gap, provided the intent isn’t to dilute the law, but to stabilise the system while maintaining enforcement integrity.
This opens the door for more institutional frameworks:
- Codified substitution provisions under PMLA;
- Judicially monitored conditional usage of assets under investigation;
- Assessment protocols to evaluate third-party or employment disruption.
Such mechanisms can shield genuine stakeholders, labourers, homebuyers, financiers, and vendors, while continuing to hold promoters accountable.
Conclusion: Justice Is Also What We Protect
Justice is not just about what the law punishes; it is about what society preserves. In cases like M3M’s, the courts are not choosing sides between guilt and innocence; they are choosing between blanket punishment and balanced enforcement. That distinction, though subtle, is critical to how India’s regulatory ecosystem will mature in the years to come.
As companies face legal scrutiny, they must be held to the highest standards of compliance and transparency. But in doing so, the law must also remember that enterprises, especially in infrastructure, are carriers of national development.
In the story of India’s growth, the scaffolding isn’t just made of steel and concrete; it is made of law, fairness, and the courage to see justice beyond the courtroom.
Author: Advocate Akarsh Garg
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. The opinions presented do not necessarily align with the opinion of Desi Kaanoon.