Facts
The petitioner invoked Article 226 seeking the unfreezing and restoration of full operation of his HDFC Bank account.
Source reference: para. 1Relying on Malcolm Murayis and Archana, he sought relief against the account freeze.
Source reference: paras. 2–4The Court recorded that the disputed amount was ₹10,000 and considered the prior decisions’ directions concerning bank-account freezes in cybercrime matters.
Source reference: paras. 4–6Issues
Whether the petitioner’s account should be unfrozen while the disputed amount is separately secured.
Source reference: paras. 5–6Whether the disputed amount should remain secured pending action by the competent Judicial Magistrate under the applicable law.
Source reference: para. 6Law Applied
Article 226 empowers the High Court to grant appropriate relief in cases concerning the freezing of bank accounts.
Source reference: no citationThe Court applied Malcolm Murayis v. State Bank of India and Others and Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others mutatis mutandis.
Source reference: paras. 3–5Under the principles reflected in those decisions and the Government’s SOP dated 10 April 2026, a restraint should be proportionate to the suspected proceeds of crime; where appropriate, the disputed amount may be secured without preventing operation of the entire account.
Source reference: paras. 4, 6The investigating agency is expected to proceed under the relevant provisions of the BNSS or other applicable law, including seeking orders from the competent Judicial Magistrate.
Source reference: paras. 4, 6Reasoning
The Court considered its earlier decisions applicable to the petitioner’s case and balanced preservation of the disputed sum against the need to permit ordinary operation of the account.
Source reference: paras. 5–6It therefore directed that the identified disputed amount of ₹10,000 be placed in a fixed deposit, while the account itself be unfrozen.
Source reference: para. 6The amount would remain secured pending an order from the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; absent such an order, it could be released to the petitioner, with intimation to the police agency.
Source reference: para. 6Holding
The Court disposed of the petition, directed that the petitioner’s bank account be unfrozen and permitted him to operate it, and ordered that ₹10,000 be kept in a fixed deposit subject to the stated three-month period and Magistrate-order condition.
The bank may take appropriate action in accordance with law if it receives a complaint concerning another transaction.
Source reference: para. 6Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Original Court PDF
Abhishek GourvsReserve Bank Of India
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
