Cybercrime freezes must preserve access to bank accounts while securing disputed sums in fixed deposits.

The petitioner challenged the freeze or hold placed on his Kotak Mahindra Bank account, seeking its removal on the ground that it had been imposed without lawful authority or an order.

He relied on *Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Others*, W.P. No. 1100 of 2024, decided on 26 April 2024, as covering his case.

The Court held that the earlier decision applied *mutatis mutandis*.

1. Whether the directions in *Malcolm Murayis* concerning bank accounts frozen following crime-agency instructions applied to the petitioner’s account.

2. Whether the account should be unfrozen while the amount identified by the crime agencies was protected pending action by the competent Judicial Magistrate.

The Court applied its decision in *Malcolm Murayis*, which directed that the disputed amount identified by crime agencies be kept in fixed deposits and liquidated only after orders by the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; if no such orders were passed within that period, the amount could be released to the petitioners under intimation to the crime agencies.

That decision referred to compliance with Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or other applicable law.

In the present case, the Court framed the expected police action by reference to the relevant provisions of the BNSS or any other law relied upon, without specifying a particular BNSS provision.

The Court accepted that the present case was governed by *Malcolm Murayis* and applied its directions *mutatis mutandis*.

Accordingly, it balanced the petitioner’s ability to operate the account against preservation of the amount reported by the crime agencies: the account was to be unfrozen, while the disputed amount was to remain in fixed deposits pending orders of the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months. If no such orders were made in that period, the amount could be withdrawn under intimation to the police agency.

In the absence of such orders within that period, the amount could be withdrawn by the petitioner under intimation to the police agency.