SECTION 44 PMLA • SUPPLEMENTARY COMPLAINT • NEW ACCUSED • NEW PROPERTY • SPECIAL COURT

Supplementary Prosecution Complaint under PMLA: How New Accused, New Properties and Expanded Allegations Are Added — Cognizance, Summons, Bail, Documents and Defence Strategy

Further Investigation • Subsequent Complaint • Role Attribution • New POC • RUDs • Summons • Bail • Discharge

Research updated: 9 August 2026 | By Advocate Ankit Kumar Singh

Advocate Ankit Kumar Singh

Direct Answer: Can ED Add a New Accused After Filing the First PMLA Prosecution Complaint?

Yes. Explanation (ii) to Section 44(1) PMLA expressly recognises a subsequent complaint arising from further investigation for bringing additional oral or documentary evidence against a person involved in the alleged offence, whether that person was named in the original prosecution complaint or not.

A later complaint can therefore potentially introduce:

a new accused;
a new company or entity;
a new alleged transaction;
additional Section 50 statements;
additional banking evidence;
additional digital evidence;
a new property allegation;
a revised or expanded proceeds-of-crime calculation;
an expanded role attributed to an existing accused.

But:

ADDING AN ALLEGATION IS NOT THE SAME THING AS PROVING IT.

The Statutory Expression Is “Subsequent Complaint”

Lawyers and courts frequently use:

SUPPLEMENTARY PROSECUTION COMPLAINT.

Section 44 Explanation (ii), however, speaks of:

ANY SUBSEQUENT COMPLAINT

arising from:

FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This distinction matters when drafting statutory objections because the source of the power should be identified accurately.

Does Filing the First Complaint End ED Investigation?

No.

Section 44 expressly contemplates further investigation after the first complaint.

The sequence may therefore be:

ECIR / INVESTIGATION → FIRST PROSECUTION COMPLAINT → FURTHER INVESTIGATION → NEW EVIDENCE → SUBSEQUENT / SUPPLEMENTARY COMPLAINT.

What Can Further Investigation Add?

Potential additions include:

new statements;
bank statements;
accounting ledgers;
GST records;
company documents;
property records;
emails;
WhatsApp or other electronic communications;
phone-extraction material;
forensic reports;
new witnesses;
new fund-flow analysis;
new accused persons.

The defence should isolate which material was actually obtained after the previous complaint.

The Most Useful Defence Tool: Original vs Supplementary Complaint Matrix

Issue	Original Complaint	Supplementary Complaint
Accused	Not named	Accused No. 14
Alleged role	None	Beneficial controller
Transaction	Not attributed	₹75 lakh transfer
Property	Not mentioned	Property X alleged
Witness	None	Section 50 statement of Y
Document	None	Bank ledger / email

Then ask:

WHAT NEW EVIDENCE SUPPORTS EACH NEW ALLEGATION?

A New Accused Requires a Person-Specific Section 3 Theory

Being added to the supplementary complaint does not itself establish the offence.

The prosecution should be tested on:

What alleged proceeds of crime are involved?
Which scheduled criminal activity allegedly generated them?
What amount or property is connected to this accused?
What did the accused allegedly know?
What specific Section 3 process or activity is attributed?
What oral or documentary evidence proves it?

Association Is Not Role Attribution

The following propositions should not automatically be treated as proof of money-laundering:

DIRECTOR ≠ AUTOMATIC MONEY LAUNDERER.

EMPLOYEE ≠ AUTOMATIC MONEY LAUNDERER.

ACCOUNTANT ≠ AUTOMATIC MONEY LAUNDERER.

RELATIVE ≠ AUTOMATIC BENEFICIAL OWNER.

BANK RECIPIENT ≠ AUTOMATIC POC HOLDER.

PROPERTY OWNER ≠ AUTOMATIC SECTION 3 ACCUSED.

The complaint should disclose the alleged acts, knowledge and connection with proceeds of crime.

Build a Role-Attribution Table for Every Newly Added Accused

Issue	ED Allegation	Evidence	Defence
Control of company	Beneficial controller	Email / witness	Board / shareholding records
₹50 lakh receipt	POC	Bank entry	Invoice / commercial purpose
Property purchase	Use of POC	Sale deed	Earlier loan / lawful source
Knowledge	Knew funds were tainted	Statement	Contemporaneous communications

New Property in a Supplementary Complaint: What Does It Actually Mean?

There is a major distinction between:

PROPERTY ALLEGED IN THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

and:

PROPERTY LEGALLY ATTACHED OR FROZEN UNDER THE PMLA.

A supplementary complaint may identify Property X as alleged proceeds of crime.

That allegation does not, merely by appearing in the complaint, substitute for the statutory mechanism governing attachment, seizure or freezing.

The Four New-Property Categories

1. NEWLY ALLEGED PROPERTY

Mentioned in the supplementary complaint but not presently attached.

2. LATER PAO PROPERTY

Covered by a later provisional attachment order under Section 5.

3. SEIZED OR FROZEN PROPERTY

Subject to the applicable Section 17 / Section 18 mechanism.

4. VALUE / EQUIVALENT-VALUE THEORY

ED alleges the property is attachable on a value theory rather than because the specific asset was directly purchased with the alleged criminal proceeds.

Each category creates a different defence.

Do Not Fight a New PAO Only Through the Criminal Complaint

If ED separately attaches the new property:

the statutory attachment proceedings require their own defence.

That may involve:

SECTION 5 → SECTION 8 → SECTION 26 → SECTION 42,

depending upon the stage.

The criminal prosecution and attachment challenge should be coordinated but should not be confused.

New Property Defence: Build the Acquisition Chronology

Event	Date
Property acquired	__/__/____
Alleged scheduled activity began	__/__/____
Alleged POC generated	__/__/____
Bank debit for acquisition	__/__/____
Loan disbursement	__/__/____
Supplementary complaint	__/__/____

Chronology can reveal whether ED is alleging:

direct proceeds;
indirect proceeds;
substituted property;
equivalent value;
or a theory inconsistent with the acquisition dates.

What Happens When a New Accused Is Added After Cognizance?

This is procedurally important.

The Special Court must determine whether legal process should issue against the newly added accused.

Do not assume:

ED FILED NAME = COURT MUST SUMMON AUTOMATICALLY.

Judicial application of mind remains relevant.

Kushal Kumar Agarwal and the Section 223 Question

For complaints governed by the BNSS regime, the Supreme Court has held that the first proviso to Section 223(1) creates a mandatory pre-cognizance hearing requirement.

However, an important supplementary-complaint issue remains nuanced.

In Kushal Kumar Agarwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, ED argued that:

cognizance is taken of the offence and not an individual offender;
once cognizance of the offence has already been taken;
a later supplementary complaint should not require a fresh cognizance exercise merely because another accused is added.

The Supreme Court expressly kept those contentions open rather than deciding them.

Therefore: Do Not Use an Incorrect Absolute Rule

Do not state:

“Every supplementary complaint requires a completely fresh Section 223 hearing.”

Also do not state:

“A newly added accused can never claim a pre-process hearing.”

Instead examine:

the governing CrPC/BNSS regime;
original cognizance order;
supplementary complaint date;
the exact later judicial order;
whether fresh cognizance was purportedly taken;
whether process was issued;
whether the new accused was heard.

Parvinder Singh 2026: Why Cognizance Is Not a Clerical Exercise

In Parvinder Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2026 INSC 519, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that Sections 223 to 228 BNSS apply to PMLA complaint proceedings where that procedural regime governs.

The Court treated the Section 223 hearing requirement as substantive and tied it to fair-trial protection.

It also emphasised that taking cognizance requires judicial application of mind to the complaint and material.

New Accused Receives Court Summons: Is Bail Automatically Required?

Not necessarily.

The first question is:

WAS THIS PERSON ARRESTED BY ED BEFORE THE COMPLAINT?

Tarsem Lal Category: Never Arrested During Investigation

Where the accused:

was not arrested during investigation;
is later named in the prosecution complaint;
receives summons from the Special Court;
appears in compliance with that summons;

the Supreme Court's Tarsem Lal framework becomes important.

The normal rule recognised by the Court is:

SUMMONS — NOT WARRANT.

And:

APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO SUMMONS ≠ AUTOMATIC CUSTODY.

Accordingly, a regular-bail application is not required merely because the accused physically appears before the Special Court pursuant to that summons.

The Court may require an appearance bond under the applicable procedural provision.

Do Not Overread Tarsem Lal

Tarsem Lal does not protect:

an accused who was already arrested in the PMLA case;
a person who ignores summons;
a person against whom a valid warrant exists;
a person facing proclamation proceedings;
custody directed by a competent court;
arrest in another ECIR or criminal case.

What if the New Accused Was Arrested Before the Supplementary Complaint?

Then the analysis changes substantially.

The accused may already be in:

ED custody;
judicial custody;
custody under a remand order;
or on existing bail.

A regular-bail application may then require consideration of Section 45 and the current constitutional bail jurisprudence.

Parvinder Singh Khurana 2024: Supplementary Complaint as a Change in Circumstances

The appellant in that case was not originally named as an accused in:

the predicate FIR;
the ECIR;
or the first PMLA prosecution complaint.

He was subsequently arrested and later named as an accused in a supplementary complaint.

The Supreme Court observed that filing the supplementary complaint brought about a relevant change in circumstances because the investigation against him had been completed, permitting a fresh bail application.

The judgment does not create automatic bail after every supplementary complaint.

Supply of Documents: Start Immediately

A person added through a supplementary complaint should not prepare the defence only from the summons.

Seek the material necessary to understand the actual prosecution case, including as applicable:

supplementary complaint;
original prosecution complaint;
earlier supplementary complaints;
list of relied-upon documents;
relied-upon witness statements;
bank records;
property records;
digital extraction reports;
forensic reports;
emails/chats relied upon;
POC calculation;
property schedule;
witness list.

Section 21 PMLA: Records Seized From the Person

Section 21 separately provides that a person from whom records were seized is entitled to obtain copies of records retained under that provision.

That is important where ED seized:

company files;
books of account;
hard drives;
phones;
ledgers;
other records.

But this statutory right should not be inaccurately described as an automatic right to receive every document collected from every person during the investigation.

RUD Defence: Build a New-Material Index

RUD	New?	Used Against Whom?	Allegation
RUD-201	Yes	Accused 14	Bank transfer
RUD-202	No	Existing accused	Old statement
RUD-203	Yes	Accused 14	Property ownership

This immediately reveals whether the supplementary complaint contains genuinely new evidence or mainly repeats the existing record.

The “Incremental Evidence” Method

Do not begin by re-reading 20,000 pages as though nothing was previously analysed.

Create:

INCREMENTAL MATERIAL ONLY.

Ask:

Which documents post-date the first complaint?
Which witness was examined later?
Which bank account was newly analysed?
Which property was newly discovered?
Which allegation has changed?
Which POC number has increased?

Expanded POC: Demand a Reconciliation

Suppose:

FIRST COMPLAINT POC: ₹20 CRORE.

Supplementary complaint says:

POC: ₹35 CRORE.

Do not defend only the final ₹35 crore figure.

Prepare:

POC Component	Original	New
Transaction A	₹10 Cr	₹10 Cr
Transaction B	₹10 Cr	₹10 Cr
Transaction C	—	₹15 Cr

Then concentrate on:

WHAT SUPPORTS TRANSACTION C?

New Bank Transfers: Movement Does Not Automatically Establish Laundering

For each newly relied-upon transfer analyse:

SOURCE → ACCOUNT → DATE → PURPOSE → INVOICE / AGREEMENT → RECIPIENT → SUBSEQUENT USE → ALLEGED POC CONNECTION → ALLEGED KNOWLEDGE.

A bank entry proves movement of money.

Its criminal character requires separate proof.

New Property Allegation: Ask Whether the Property Predates the Alleged POC

Example:

Property purchased: 2019.

Alleged POC generated: 2022.

A direct-acquisition allegation therefore requires careful scrutiny.

The prosecution may rely upon a different statutory value theory, but that theory should be identified rather than silently substituting one theory for another.

New Section 50 Statement: Do Not Read Only the Extract Quoted by ED

Obtain and compare:

full statement;
question preceding the answer;
language of questioning;
documents shown;
later clarification;
retraction if any;
other statements of the same witness;
documentary corroboration.

A supplementary complaint may quote five lines from a statement running into fifty pages.

Context matters.

New Co-Accused Statement Against You

Ask:

Did the maker have personal knowledge?
Is the statement internally consistent?
Was it later retracted?
Is it corroborated by independent documents?
Does it contradict existing bank/company records?
What specific act is attributed to the new accused?

Do not allow:

“X SAID Y WAS INVOLVED”

to substitute for a complete Section 3 role analysis.

Existing Accused: Supplementary Complaint Can Expand Your Role Too

A later complaint may not add your name for the first time but may materially change the prosecution case against you.

Compare:

Issue	Original	Supplementary
Role	Recipient	Controller
POC	₹50 lakh	₹3 crore
Property	None	Property X
Knowledge	Not particularised	Email-based allegation

Defence Against “Ever-Expanding Allegations”

Further investigation is legally recognised.

Therefore the defence should not argue merely:

“ED cannot add anything because the first complaint was already filed.”

That argument conflicts with Section 44.

The stronger challenge is:

WHAT IS THE NEW EVIDENCE, AND DOES IT ACTUALLY SUPPORT THE NEW ALLEGATION?

Recycled Material vs New Evidence

GENUINELY NEW

Bank account discovered after first complaint.

RE-INTERPRETED

Same bank record, but ED now gives it a different meaning.

REPEATED

Same statement and same allegation reproduced.

EXPANDED

Old evidence used to allege a broader role.

These categories should be separated in the defence note.

Contradiction Between First and Supplementary Complaints

Look for:

different POC amounts;
different dates;
different beneficial owners;
different source of funds;
different alleged controllers;
different role of the same witness;
different reason for the same transfer;
different property theory.

Not every difference is fatal because further investigation may legitimately develop the case.

But unexplained inconsistency can become significant at discharge, bail or trial.

Supplementary Complaint and Discharge

A discharge strategy should read:

ALL COMPLAINTS TOGETHER

but should analyse:

THE ACCUSED-SPECIFIC MATERIAL SEPARATELY.

Questions include:

Is the scheduled-offence foundation identified?
Is POC identified?
Is the accused connected with that POC?
Is Section 3 activity attributed?
Is knowledge alleged where necessary?
Is the allegation based only on association?
Do relied documents contradict the allegation?

Supplementary Complaint and Bail

A supplementary complaint can affect bail in different directions.

PROSECUTION ARGUMENT

New evidence strengthens the alleged role.

DEFENCE ARGUMENT

Further investigation against the accused is complete, documentary evidence has been collected and continued custody is unnecessary.

Whether either argument succeeds depends upon:

custody status;
Section 45;
individual role;
trial delay;
nature of evidence;
risk factors;
constitutional liberty considerations.

30-Point Supplementary Complaint Defence Audit

Obtain original complaint.
Obtain every supplementary complaint.
Record filing dates.
Record cognizance dates.
Identify governing CrPC/BNSS regime.
Read Section 44 Explanation (ii).
Identify newly added accused.
Identify expanded existing roles.
Identify new entities.
Identify new witnesses.
Identify new Section 50 statements.
Identify new bank records.
Identify new digital records.
Identify new properties.
Check separate attachment status.
Identify original POC quantum.
Identify revised POC quantum.
Prepare incremental POC reconciliation.
Map accused to alleged POC.
Map accused to Section 3 activity.
Identify knowledge allegation.
Seek relied-upon material.
Obtain copies of seized records where Section 21 applies.
Review cognizance/process order.
Analyse Section 223 issue where applicable.
Check summons vs warrant.
Apply Tarsem Lal if factually applicable.
Reassess bail after new complaint.
Reassess discharge strategy.
Compare every new allegation against contemporaneous documents.

Supplementary Complaint Defence Flowchart

A supplementary or subsequent complaint under Section 44 should be analysed as an incremental prosecution document: identify what new evidence was obtained, what new accused or property theory was introduced, what judicial process followed and how the new allegations affect summons, bail, discharge and trial strategy.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can ED file more than one prosecution complaint?

Yes. Section 44 expressly contemplates a subsequent complaint arising from further investigation.

2. Can someone not named in the first complaint be added later?

Yes. Explanation (ii) expressly includes further evidence against an accused whether named in the original complaint or not.

3. Does ED need a new ECIR every time it adds an accused?

Not merely because further investigation identifies another alleged participant in the same money-laundering offence. The exact ECIR and scheduled-offence foundation should nevertheless be checked.

4. Can a supplementary complaint add a new company?

It may array an entity if ED claims further investigation supports a legally sustainable money-laundering allegation against that entity.

5. Can ED add new properties?

It can add allegations concerning newly identified property or property transactions to the supplementary complaint. That is different from legally attaching the property under the separate statutory attachment mechanism.

6. Does naming property in the complaint automatically freeze it?

No. A criminal complaint and a statutory attachment/freezing order perform different legal functions.

7. Can ED increase the alleged POC amount?

Further investigation may lead ED to allege additional proceeds. The defence should require transaction-wise reconciliation of the increase.

8. Does a supplementary complaint require fresh cognizance?

This must be analysed carefully. Cognizance is ordinarily of the offence, and in Kushal Kumar Agarwal the Supreme Court expressly left open ED's argument concerning whether a fresh hearing/cognizance exercise is necessary when later supplementary complaints are filed.

9. Is Section 223 BNSS applicable to PMLA complaint procedure?

The Supreme Court has held in the applicable post-BNSS context that Sections 223 to 228 BNSS govern PMLA complaint procedure.

10. Must a newly added accused always receive a fresh Section 223 hearing?

Do not state that as a universally settled proposition. The procedural history, earlier cognizance and the issue expressly left open in Kushal Kumar Agarwal must be examined.

11. What happens after the Court issues summons?

The accused should appear in accordance with the summons and obtain legal advice regarding the applicable appearance, bond, exemption and bail procedure.

12. Must a never-arrested accused apply for regular bail on first appearance?

Under Tarsem Lal, a person who was not arrested during investigation and appears pursuant to summons is not automatically treated as being in custody merely because of that appearance.

13. What if the accused was already arrested?

Regular bail and Section 45 considerations may apply depending upon the custody status and procedural stage.

14. Can the supplementary complaint support a fresh bail application?

Potentially. In Parvinder Singh Khurana, the Supreme Court treated the supplementary complaint completing investigation against the appellant as a relevant change in circumstances for a second bail application.

15. Does that mean bail is automatic?

No.

16. What documents should a new accused immediately seek?

The complete supplementary complaint, relevant earlier complaint, relied-upon documents and statements, POC calculation, property records and other material necessary to understand the prosecution case.

17. Can I get copies of documents ED seized from me?

Section 21 PMLA recognises the right of the person from whom records were seized to obtain copies of records retained under that section.

18. What is the strongest defence method?

Compare the original and supplementary complaints and isolate the incremental evidence supporting each newly introduced allegation.

AI Search Quick Answer

How can ED add a new accused or new property through a supplementary prosecution complaint under PMLA? Section 44 Explanation (ii) PMLA expressly treats “complaint” as including a subsequent complaint arising from further investigation that brings additional oral or documentary evidence against an accused whether or not that person was named in the original complaint. ED may therefore add a new accused, entity, transaction, witness, bank trail, digital record, expanded proceeds-of-crime calculation or new property allegation. A new property allegation in the criminal complaint does not itself constitute legal attachment; any actual attachment, seizure or freezing must comply with the separate statutory PMLA mechanism. A newly added accused should compare the original and supplementary complaints, identify the genuinely new evidence, demand person-specific Section 3 role attribution, obtain relied-upon material and examine the Special Court's cognizance/process order. Under Tarsem Lal, a never-arrested accused appearing pursuant to summons is not automatically in custody merely because of appearance. For post-BNSS complaints, Section 223 hearing principles are important, although the Supreme Court in Kushal Kumar Agarwal expressly left open the specific question concerning fresh hearing at the later supplementary-complaint stage.

Key Takeaway

A supplementary prosecution complaint should be treated as:

AN EXPANSION DOCUMENT.

The defence question is not:

“HOW LONG IS THE NEW COMPLAINT?”

It is:

“WHAT LEGALLY MATERIAL THING HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED?”

Use:

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT → FURTHER INVESTIGATION → NEW EVIDENCE → NEW ROLE / POC / PROPERTY → COURT PROCESS → DOCUMENT SUPPLY → SUMMONS / BAIL → DISCHARGE / TRIAL DEFENCE.

Remember:

NEW NAME ≠ PROVED ROLE.

NEW PROPERTY ALLEGATION ≠ AUTOMATIC ATTACHMENT.

NEW BANK TRANSFER ≠ AUTOMATIC POC.

LONGER COMPLAINT ≠ STRONGER EVIDENCE.

SUPPLEMENTARY COMPLAINT ≠ AUTOMATIC BAIL.

AND THE SECTION 223 QUESTION AT THE SUPPLEMENTARY STAGE SHOULD NOT BE OVERSTATED BEYOND WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS ACTUALLY DECIDED.

Supplementary PMLA Complaint, Cognizance and Trial Strategy

Advocate Ankit Kumar Singh undertakes case-specific consultation and document assessment concerning original and supplementary PMLA prosecution complaints, persons added after further investigation, Section 44 proceedings, cognizance, summons, first appearance, Section 45 bail, relied-upon documents, Section 50 statements, new property allegations, proceeds-of-crime reconciliation, role attribution, discharge and trial strategy, subject to accepted professional engagement, jurisdiction and applicable procedure.

Phone: 8294431232
Email: ankitsingh.legum@gmail.com
Website: advocateankitkumarsingh.in

Where filing or acting before the Supreme Court of India requires an Advocate-on-Record, applicable Supreme Court procedure must be followed.

Official and Primary Research Sources

Add Advocate Ankit Kumar Singh as a Preferred Source on Google

Readers who want to see more legal research, court updates, cyber law, PMLA, ED, criminal-law and litigation content from Advocate Ankit Kumar Singh can add advocateankitkumarsingh.in as a Preferred Source on Google.

Add advocateankitkumarsingh.in as a Preferred Source on Google

Disclaimer: This article is intended for general legal education concerning prosecution complaints, subsequent complaints and further investigation under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002. Whether a later complaint validly adds a person, entity, transaction, property allegation or additional evidence depends upon the actual complaint, further-investigation record, scheduled-offence foundation, applicable CrPC/BNSS regime and orders of the Special Court. A property merely described in a supplementary prosecution complaint should not be confused with a property that has been separately attached, seized or frozen under the applicable PMLA provisions. The applicability of a pre-cognizance hearing to a particular supplementary-complaint situation requires careful procedural analysis; the Supreme Court in Kushal Kumar Agarwal expressly left open the prosecution's contention regarding subsequent complaints after cognizance of the offence. Tarsem Lal principles likewise depend upon the accused's arrest, summons, warrant and appearance history. No discharge, bail, quashing, release of property or other result can be guaranteed.