Cybercrime-linked bank accounts must be unfrozen while disputed funds remain secured in fixed deposits.

The petitioner sought a writ directing Bank of India to unfreeze his savings account and permit its normal operation.

The Court treated the matter as covered by Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India and Others, W.P. No. 1100 of 2024, in which accounts had been frozen following communications from cybercrime authorities.

The present order does not set out further particulars of the alleged cybercrime or the amount disputed in the petitioner’s account.

Whether the petitioner’s case was governed by the directions in Malcolm Murayis concerning bank accounts frozen on the instructions of crime agencies.

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

The Court applied its decision in Malcolm Murayis, which directed that the disputed amount identified by cybercrime agencies be kept in fixed deposits and permitted liquidation only upon orders of a competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; absent such orders, the amount could be withdrawn by the account holders under intimation to the agencies.

The earlier 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 required police action by reference to the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, or any other law relied upon.

The Court held that the Malcolm Murayis directions applied mutatis mutandis.

The Court considered the petitioner’s case covered by Malcolm Murayis and adopted its safeguards without separately examining the underlying cybercrime allegations.

Applying that precedent, it directed that the amount identified by the crime agencies be preserved in fixed deposits pending orders from a competent Judicial Magistrate, while allowing the petitioner’s bank account to be unfrozen.

The deposits could be liquidated only after orders from a competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; failing such orders, the petitioner could withdraw the amount under intimation to the Police agency.

The petitioner’s bank account was to be unfrozen.