Madras High Court Upholds Sealing of Trust Linked to PFI Under UAPA

After the Union Government banned the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its affiliates in September 2022 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, alleging involvement in unlawful activities, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) recently upheld the attachment and sealing of premises belonging to the Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust in Theni district alleged to be associated with the banned outfit.

A division bench comprising Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan and Justice R. Poornima dismissed a writ petition challenging the order of the Principal District Judge, Theni, which had confirmed the District Magistrate’s decision dated September 30, 2022 attaching the trust’s property under Sections 7 and 8 of the UAPA.

The case arose after the National Investigation Agency registered an FIR in September 2022 against alleged office bearers and members of PFI for offences under the IPC and UAPA. The allegations included criminal conspiracy, promotion of enmity between religious groups, and involvement in unlawful activities.

Soon thereafter, the Government of India issued a notification dated September 27, 2022 under Section 3(1) of the UAPA declaring PFI and its associates, affiliates and fronts as an unlawful association for five years. The Central Government also delegated powers under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act to the State Government.

Acting on this delegation, the District Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Theni, passed an order on September 30, 2022 attaching and sealing the premises of the first petitioner at Muthuthevanpatti, treating it as a place used for the purposes of an unlawful association. The order also directed preparation of an inventory of movables and restrained alienation of the property.

The petitioners contended that no notification had specifically declared them an unlawful association under Section 3(1) of the Act. They argued that the notification was confined to PFI and certain named organisations and that, in the absence of a declaration against them, the District Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to pass an order under Section 8. They further submitted that what was ordered was an attachment and sealing of the premises, which they claimed went beyond the scope of Section 8.

On the other hand, the respondents maintained that the petitioners were affiliates of PFI. Relying on witness statements, seized documents and common contact details in pamphlets, the authorities argued that the trust and its institution functioned as fronts of the banned organisation.

The high court examined the material placed on record, including statements of witnesses and documents seized during searches. It noted that the founders of PFI were members of the petitioners’ association and that evidence indicated organisational overlap and operational links. On that basis, court held that the notification declaring PFI and its associates unlawful covered the petitioners as affiliates.

Addressing the nature of the order passed, the bench held that Section 8 of the UAPA empowers the District Magistrate to notify and prohibit the use of premises associated with an unlawful association. The so-called attachment was, in substance, a prohibitory order restraining use and regulating access to the premises, and therefore fell within the statutory framework.

Court also distinguished proceedings under Section 8 from those under Section 25 of the Act, which deal with seizure or forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism. It observed that the two provisions operate in different fields and that the pendency of an appeal against an order under Section 25 did not affect the validity of action under Section 8.

Finding no infirmity in the District Judge’s order confirming the attachment, the high court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the sealing of the property. No costs were awarded.

Case Title: The Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust and Another vs. The Government of India and Others

Order Date: February 4, 2026

Bench: Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan and Justice R. Poornima