MP HC Unfreezes Woman’s Bank Account, Keeps Rs 63,675 Disputed Amount In FD Pending Magistrate’s Order Within 3 Months

The petitioner invoked Article 226 of the Constitution seeking directions to unfreeze her bank account.

Her counsel submitted that her case was covered by Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Others, which concerned bank-account freezes following cybercrime complaints.

The Court also considered Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others, which addressed the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) dated 10 April 2026 for grievances concerning accounts placed on hold through the NCRP-CFCFRMS mechanism.

The Court identified Rs. 63,675 as the disputed amount in the petitioner’s case.

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

The Court applied Malcolm Murayis, under which the disputed amount may be secured in a fixed deposit pending orders of the competent Judicial Magistrate, with release contemplated if the police do not proceed within the prescribed period.

It also applied Archana, which considered the SOP dated 10 April 2026 and the principles that account freezes should be proportionate, that a disputed amount should ordinarily be secured without unnecessarily restricting the account holder’s access to legitimate funds, and that the prescribed grievance and investigative procedures should be followed.

The Court referred to the police’s obligation to proceed under the relevant provisions of the BNSS or other applicable law.

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

It therefore separated the restraint over the disputed sum from the operation of the account: Rs. 63,675 was to be retained in a fixed deposit, while the account was to be unfrozen. The police were expected to obtain the competent Judicial Magistrate’s orders within three months; absent such orders, the fixed-deposit amount could be withdrawn by the petitioner after informing the police agency.

That amount may be liquidated only after orders of the competent Judicial Magistrate; if no such orders are passed within three months, the petitioner may withdraw it under intimation to the police agency.