Cyber-fraud account freezes must be proportionate, securing only the disputed amount.

The petitioner sought a writ directing Axis Bank to unfreeze its current account and permit it to operate the account.

It relied on Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Others and Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others, concerning the freezing of bank accounts in cybercrime cases and the applicable grievance-redressal procedure.

The disputed amount identified in this petition was Rs. 4,20,254.

Whether the principles in Malcolm Murayis and Archana, including the applicable Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), applied to the petitioner’s frozen account.

Whether the petitioner’s account should be unfrozen while the disputed amount was separately secured pending action by the competent authority.

In exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, the Court applied the principles in Malcolm Murayis, which permitted the disputed amount in a frozen account to be secured separately, with release dependent on timely action by the competent Judicial Magistrate.

It also applied Archana, which discussed the Ministry of Home Affairs’ SOP dated 10 April 2026 for grievances concerning accounts placed on hold through the NCRP-CFCFRMS, and emphasized proportionate account restrictions and the prescribed grievance mechanism.

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

The Court found that the principles in Malcolm Murayis and Archana applied mutatis mutandis to the petitioner’s case.

It therefore distinguished the disputed sum from the rest of the account balance: the Rs. 4,20,254 was to be secured in a fixed deposit, while the account itself was to be unfrozen. This approach preserved the disputed amount pending lawful action without preventing the petitioner from operating the account.

The disputed Rs. 4,20,254 must be kept in a fixed deposit and may be liquidated only after orders are passed by the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months. If no such orders are passed within that period, the petitioner may withdraw the fixed-deposit amount after informing the police agency.

The Bank may take appropriate action in accordance with law if it receives a complaint concerning another transaction.