Hemant Kapish vs State Bank Of India

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:26629
1 WP-14304-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI
rd
ON THE 3 OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 14304 of 2026
HEMANT KAPISH
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Prashant Bitthariya - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harshavardhan Topre- Advocate for respondent No.1.
ORDER
This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs:
"7. a) respondent no. 1 and respondent no.3 for unfreezing of the
subject account of the present petition;
b) notice dated 08.04.2024 may kindly be quashed in the interest
of justice;
c) Cost of the petition may kindly be awarded;
d) Any other relief may be given which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case"
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the
petitioners is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the
case of Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others
Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others passed in W.P.
No.1100 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024.
3. So far as the decision rendered in the case of Malcolm Murayis
(supra) is concerned, the same reads as under:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 9/3/2026
7:27:28 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:26629
2 WP-14304-2026
"1] This order shall also govern the disposal of W.P.
Nos.1100/2024 and 1185/2024 as in both the petitions identical
reliefs have been sought by the parties.
2] These petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article
226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) This petition may kindly be allowed with cost.
b) To direct the Respondent No. 2 thereby directing
Respondents to remove the hold/freeze on the Bank account
of petitioners.
c) Issue such other orders, writ, and direction as this Hon’ble
court deems fit in the interest of justice in favour of
petitioner.”
3] The grievance of the petitioners is that they are engaged in
trading of crypto and virtual currency, and having their bank
accounts with State Bank of India and ICICI Bank, which have
been freezed all of a sudden, only on the intimation sent by the
cyber cells of the various police stations, viz., respondent Nos.3 to
9, to freeze the aforesaid account on the allegation that the
accounts are involved in some cyber fraud. The amounts of which
have also been disclosed, as to how much of the amount is
credited in the account of the petitioners, which are linked to
cyber crime/fraud.
4] Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners
have never received any notice from any police station regarding
their involvement in any such offence, and even otherwise, they
are lawfully carrying out their business of trading, and it appears
that some person who was involved in fraud has transacted
through the petitioners. Thus, it is submitted that the petitioners
may be allowed to operate their bank account, and so far as the
amount which is said to be credited on account of the cyber fraud,
it is submitted that it may be kept in separate fixed deposits so that
the same can be withdrawn as and when the clean chit is given to
the petitioner. Counsel has also submitted that none of the
investigating agencies have complied with Section 102 of Cr.P.C.
and have not informed the concerned Magistrate about such
seizure. Thus, it is submitted that the petition be allowed.
5] Counsel for the respondents Banks have submitted that the
Banks have not freezed the account of the petitioners on their own
but only at the instructions of various cyber cell police stations,
and are bound by the instructions issued by such investigating
authorities. Thus, it is submitted that the appropriate orders may be
passed.
6] Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7] From the record, it is found that this Court vide its order dated
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 9/3/2026
7:27:28 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:26629
3 WP-14304-2026
14/03/2024 has passed an interim order in the following manner:-
“Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.
Let notice be issued to respondents No.3 to 9 in WP No.1100/2024
and respondents No.3 to 6 in WP No.1185/2024 on payment of
process fees within three working days, returnable within further
two weeks time, who are various police authorities and who have
sent the requests to the respondent No.1/SBI to freeze the account
of the petitioners, alleging some cyber crime.
Since the notices have been served on respondent No.1 SBI by the
aforesaid authorities through email only, the notice of this petition
shall also be sent to these authorities through their respective
emails, so as to expedite the matter.
On payment of separate process fees, the petitioners are also
permitted to serve dasti notice to the respondent No.3 ICICI Bank
in WP No.1185/2024, whereas the other respondents shall be
served through emails. Notice shall be returnable within two
weeks time.
Shri Arpit Guru, learned counsel for the SBI is also directed to
apprise the investigating agencies who are respondents No.3 to 9
in WP No.1100/2024 and respondents No.3 to 6 in WP
No.1185/2024 about the court's proceeding today, so that they can
also submit their reply expeditiously.
The respondents are directed to file their reply positively within
further three weeks time.
As an interim measure, it is directed that till the next date of
hearing, each of the petitioners shall be allowed to withdraw
Rs.50,000/- per month from their respective accounts.”
(emphasis supplied)
8] In compliance of the aforesaid order, State Bank of India has
already sent emails to the concerned cyber crime cell of various
police stations but except the cyber crime cell of Banglore,
Karnataka / respondent No.4 in connected petition W.P.
No.1185/2024, no other police station has taken trouble to respond
to the emails sent to them, which also demonstrates the poor
functioning and irresponsible approach of the said cyber crime
cells of various States as on one hand they had sent emails to the
various banks to freeze certain accounts, and on the other hand
they are not willing to respond to the emails sent to them.
9] In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to dispose of this
petition with a direction to the respondents/Bank to keep the
disputed amount as informed to them by various cyber crime
agencies, in fixed deposits, which shall be allowed to be
liquidated only after the orders are passed by the competent
Judicial Magistrate within three months’ time as it is expected

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 9/3/2026
7:27:28 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:26629
4 WP-14304-2026
from the cyber crime police to proceed in accordance with law
under Section 102 of Cr.P.C., or any other law on which they are
relying upon, failing which the amount so kept in FDs may also be
allowed to be withdrawn by the petitioners under intimation to the
cyber crime agencies.
10] With the aforesaid direction, the petitions stand disposed of."

4. On due consideration, this Court is of the considered opinion that
the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Malcolm Murayis (supra)
shall be applicable mutatis mutandis in the present case also.
5. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to dispose of this
petition with a direction to the respondents/Bank to keep the disputed
amount as informed to it by the crime agencies in fixed deposits, which shall
be allowed to be liquidated only after the orders are passed by the competent
Judicial Magistrate within three months’ time as it is expected from the
Police agency to proceed in accordance with law under the relevant
provisions of the BNSS or any other law on which it is relying upon, failing
which the amount so kept in FD may also be allowed to be withdrawn by the
petitioner under intimation to the Police agency. In the present case also, the
SBI bank account of the petitioner bearing Account No.31792810728 shall
be unfrozen.
6. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed off.

(PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
VJ

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI
Signing time: 9/3/2026
7:27:28 PM