MP HC Unfreezes Bank Account, Keeps Disputed ₹32,000 In FD For Withdrawal If No Magistrate Order Comes Within 3 Months

The petitioner sought a writ under Article 226 directing State Bank of India to remove the hold or lien on his account, No. 20343044788

Relying on Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India and Others, W.P. No. 1100 of 2024, and Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, counsel submitted that the disputed amount in this case was Rs. 32,000

The Court considered the principles and directions in those decisions applicable to the petitioner’s case

Under Article 226, the Court may grant relief concerning a bank-account freeze.

The Court applied Malcolm Murayis and Archana mutatis mutandis

The principles from Archana, based on the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Standard Operating Procedure dated 10 April 2026, require account freezes to be proportionate and ordinarily limited to the suspected amount; they also contemplate prompt judicial oversight and grievance redressal

The disputed funds may be preserved in a fixed deposit pending the competent Magistrate’s orders under the BNSS or other applicable law.

Applying the cited decisions to this case, the Court directed that the account be unfrozen so the petitioner could operate it, while the identified disputed amount of Rs. 32,000 remained secured in a fixed deposit.

This approach preserved the disputed funds without continuing the restraint on the account as a whole.

The police agency was expected to proceed under the applicable law and obtain the competent Judicial Magistrate’s orders within three months

The Rs. 32,000 disputed amount was to remain in a fixed deposit pending the competent Judicial Magistrate’s orders within three months; failing such orders, the petitioner could withdraw that amount after intimating the police agency