Nikunj Jain vs Jio Payments Bank Ltd

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:30437
1 CONC-5770-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI
th
ON THE 29 OF OCTOBER, 2026
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 5770 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC020330972026
NIKUNJ JAIN
Versus
JIO PAYMENTS BANK LTD AND ANR
Appearance:
Shri Hritik Yadav - Advocate for the petitioner.
ORDER
1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs:


Punish the contemnors for the contempt of orders dated
07.07.2026 passed in WP 24422 of 2026 by the Hon’ble High
Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore.

(a) Allow the present contempt petition with costs.

(b) Any other order / direction deemed fit in the facts and
circumstances in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the
petitioner is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the
case of Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others passed
in W.P. No.1100 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 30-10-2026
10:20:48

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:30437
2 CONC-5770-2026
3. So far as the decision rendered in the case of Malcolm Murayis

(supra) is concerned, the same reads as under:-


"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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 30-10-2026
10:20:48

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:30437
3 CONC-5770-2026
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
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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 30-10-2026
10:20:48

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:30437
4 CONC-5770-2026
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 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 co-ordinate Bench of 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 off 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 30-10-2026
10:20:48

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:30437
5 CONC-5770-2026
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.
6. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed off.
(PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
bks
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 30-10-2026
10:20:48