A bank account must be unfrozen while the disputed cyber-fraud amount is secured in fixed deposit.

The petitioner sought a direction to unfreeze its current account with IDBI Bank and permit it to operate the account.

Relying on Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Ors. and Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., the petitioner challenged the restraint imposed in connection with alleged cyber-fraud transactions.

The disputed amount identified in the petition was ₹4,22,091, involving multiple transactions.

1. Whether the petitioner’s account should be unfrozen while the disputed amount is secured separately.

2. Whether the disputed amount should remain secured pending proceedings before the competent Judicial Magistrate, and what should follow if no order is passed within the specified period.

The Court applied Malcolm Murayis, which directed that disputed sums connected with cyber-fraud allegations be kept in fixed deposits and permitted withdrawal if the investigating agency failed to proceed before the competent Magistrate within three months.

It also applied Archana, including the Ministry of Home Affairs’ SOP dated 10 April 2026 and the principles of proportionality and protection of legitimate banking operations: a restraint should ordinarily be limited to the suspected amount where that sufficiently protects the investigation, and authorities should follow the prescribed grievance process.

The Court further directed the police agency to proceed under the relevant provisions of the BNSS or other applicable law.

The Court considered the directions in Malcolm Murayis and Archana applicable mutatis mutandis to the petitioner’s case.

It balanced preservation of the suspected proceeds with the petitioner’s ability to conduct legitimate banking operations by directing that only the identified disputed amount be kept in a fixed deposit and that the account otherwise be unfrozen.

The police agency was expected to seek appropriate orders from the competent Magistrate within three months; absent such orders, the fixed-deposit amount could be withdrawn by the petitioner after informing the police agency.

IDBI Bank was directed to unfreeze the petitioner’s account and permit its operation, while keeping ₹4,22,091 in a fixed deposit.

That amount may be liquidated only after an order of the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; if no such order is passed within that period, the petitioner may withdraw it after notifying the police agency.