### Writ petitions challenging freeze actions in criminal investigations must be styled and heard as Criminal Writ Petitions.

The petitioner, a payment aggregation platform, challenged the freezing of its Escrow account maintained with Yes Bank (Respondent No. 3).

The action was initiated via notices dated 23.01.2026 and 24.01.2026 issued by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Tamil Nadu (Respondent No. 4).

The police invoked Sections 94 and 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and Section 69 of the IT Act, following investigations into FIR No. 35/2025 regarding alleged cyber-fraud.

The petitioner filed a Writ Petition (Civil), arguing the matter concerned civil rights/property under Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A, whereas the respondents contended it should be a Writ Petition (Criminal) as the action arose from a criminal investigation.

Whether a writ petition challenging the freezing of a bank account under the BNSS during a criminal investigation is maintainable as a Writ Petition (Civil) or must be registered as a Writ Petition (Criminal).

The court primarily applied the jurisdictional distinction between civil and criminal writs under Article 226 of the Constitution.

It relied on the test established in *M/s Nagpur Cable Operators’ Association v. Commissioner of Police, Nagpur* and *N. Prakash v. Manoj Kumar*, which mandates that if a proceeding relates to investigation, enquiry, or trial of offences that may result in punishment or forfeiture, it must be treated as "criminal".

It further considered the statutory scope of Sections 106 and 107 of the BNSS regarding the seizure and attachment of property during investigations.

The court reasoned that the "genesis of the entire dispute" lies in an ongoing criminal investigation (FIR No. 35/2025).

While the petitioner argued that bank freezing is a civil consequence akin to PMLA attachments under *Vijay Madanlal Choudhary*, the court found that since the police specifically invoked investigative powers under Section 106 of the BNSS to preserve "proceeds of crime," the predominant nature of the *lis* is criminal.

The court clarified that the nomenclature of a writ is determined by the nature of the action being challenged—here, a police investigation—rather than its incidental effect on civil or fundamental rights.

Consequently, the challenge to notices issued by a law enforcement agency during an active probe falls within the criminal jurisdiction of the High Court.

It directed the Registry to re-register the petition as a "Writ Petition (Criminal)" and, subject to the orders of the Hon’ble Chief Justice, list it before the appropriate Bench.

The court clarified that this decision is limited to the maintainability of the civil nomenclature and does not reflect on the merits of the account freeze.