The account must be unfrozen while the disputed amount remains secured in a fixed deposit.

The petitioner sought a direction under Article 226 of the Constitution to remove the lien or hold on his Bank of Maharashtra account and permit unrestricted operation of it

He relied on *Malcolm Murayis & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Ors.*, W.P. No. 1100 of 2024, and *Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.*, decided on 27 July 2026, including the latter decision’s guidelines concerning account freezes under the Ministry of Home Affairs’ SOP dated 10 April 2026

The disputed amount identified in the present petition was Rs. 5,710

1. Whether the petitioner’s bank account should be unfrozen while the disputed amount is separately secured

2. Whether the disputed amount should remain secured pending action by the competent Judicial Magistrate under the applicable law

Article 226 empowers the High Court to grant appropriate relief where a bank-account freeze warrants judicial intervention. The Court applied *Malcolm Murayis* and *Archana* *mutatis mutandis*

In particular, the *Archana* guidelines, drawing on the MHA SOP dated 10 April 2026, require account restraints in cybercrime matters to be proportionate and, where practicable, limited to the suspected amount; they also provide for a grievance mechanism and timely action by the Bank and investigating authorities.

The Court further directed that the disputed sum be retained in a fixed deposit pending orders of the competent Judicial Magistrate under the relevant provisions of the BNSS or other applicable law

Applying the cited decisions, the Court concluded that the petitioner’s case was governed by the same principles.

It preserved the disputed sum of Rs. 5,710 in a fixed deposit while permitting the petitioner to operate the account, thereby securing the amount in question without continuing a restriction on the account as a whole.

The Court also provided that, if another complaint concerning a different entry was received, the Bank could take appropriate action in accordance with law and the SOP.

The disputed Rs. 5,710 must remain in a fixed deposit and may be liquidated only after orders are passed by the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; failing such orders, the petitioner may withdraw the amount under intimation to the Police agency.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.