Where the disputed amount is identifiable, the account must be unfrozen while that amount is secured.

The petitioner’s Bandhan Bank savings account was frozen in connection with a disputed transaction of Rs. 1,500.

Invoking Article 226 of the Constitution, he sought de-freezing of the account, with a lien limited to the disputed amount.

He relied on Malcolm Murayis v. State Bank of India and the later decision in Archana v. State of Madhya Pradesh concerning proportionality and the grievance mechanism for cybercrime-related account freezes.

Whether the petitioner’s account should remain frozen in full when the disputed amount was Rs. 1,500

Whether the disputed amount could instead be secured by a fixed deposit while permitting the petitioner to operate the remainder of the account

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

The decisions in Malcolm Murayis and Archana establish that a restraint imposed to secure suspected proceeds of crime should be proportionate; where the disputed amount can be secured separately, the entire account need not ordinarily remain frozen.

The Archana decision also refers to the Ministry of Home Affairs SOP dated 10 April 2026, which provides a grievance-redressal process for accounts placed on hold through the NCRP-CFCFRMS.

The Court further directed that the disputed amount be dealt with under the relevant provisions of the BNSS or other applicable law, with the competent Judicial Magistrate to pass orders within three months.

The Court considered the relief sought in light of Malcolm Murayis and Archana, which it held applicable mutatis mutandis.

Since the identified disputed transaction was only Rs. 1,500, the Court directed that this sum be preserved in a fixed deposit rather than maintaining a freeze over the entire account.

This secured the disputed amount while allowing the petitioner to resume ordinary account operations.

The fixed deposit may be liquidated only after an order of the competent Judicial Magistrate within three months; if the police do not proceed in accordance with law within that period, the petitioner may withdraw the amount after notifying the police agency.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.