THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Axis Bank Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
Enforcement Directorate And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/6740 OF 2023
Decided On : 30-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background concerning conflicting attachment orders and account freezing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding inter-agency jurisdiction and compliance risk. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Heard Mr. P Das, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R K D Choudhury, learned Dy. S.G.I, appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition has assailed the orders dated 03-10-2023 and 17-10-2023, issued by the Authorized Officer/Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, Guwahati, Zonal Office, directing the petitioner to make a Demand Draft of the frozen amount in 2 (two) accounts maintained with petitioner Bank, in favour of the “Joint Director”, Enforcement Directorate, payable at Guwahati.
3. The petitioner bank was maintaining accounts of 2 (two) customers namely “Virtous Payment Solutions LLP”, and “Wonder Enterprises” at its Udyog Vihar Branch, Gurugram, Haryana, and Faridabad, Sector-21 C, Faridabad Branch, Faridabad, Haryana respectively.
It is further projected that the Cyber Crime Police Station, Kohima, Nagaland, had registered one FIR, vide Crime No.03/2021, dated 08-10-2021 for offence committed under Section 420/120B of IPC read with Section 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act. Offences punishable under , 120B , being scheduled offences under Paragraph-1 of Part A of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, an ECIR was registered, vide ECIR No.GWZO-11/09/2022, dated 12-04-2022, for investigation, under the provisions of the said Act of 2002. Similar proceedings came to be instituted by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Hyderabad. Notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C., came to be issued to the petitioner bank, whereby, the petitioner bank was asked to provide the details of bank Account No.922020031689839 of “Virtous Payment Solutions”, which was contended to be necessitated for investigation in connection with FIR No.37/2023 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Rachakonda, Hyderabad. The petitioner responded to the said notice and had submitted all the details of the bank account so highlighted.
It is further projected that the petitioner bank's branch at Udyog Vihar had also received notices on various dates from Pelhar Police Station, Maharashtra, whereby, the concerned police station had sought for information regarding various transactions done and for marking debit freeze in the account of “Virtous Payment Solutions” maintained with Udyog Vihar Branch. Such notices was also projected to have been received from Mahamandir Police Station, Rajasthan, and Cyber Crime Police Station, Bangalore, with regard to requiring information of various transactions made in the account of “Wonder Enterprises” and for marking ‘debit freeze’ in the said account maintained with the Sector-21C Faridabad Branch, of the petitioner bank.
It is further projected that during the pendency of the said queries, the Enforcement Directorate had investigated into the matter and on completion of investigation, the Assistant Director/Authorized Officer, Enforcement Director, Zone 1, Guwahati, had passed an order on 21-04-2023, directing the petitioner bank to freeze the bank account standing in the name of “Virtous Payment Solutions LLP” and also in the name of “Wonder Enterprises”, at the respective branches of the petitioner Bank.
It is projected that the Assistant Director/Authorized Officer had thereafter, filed an application before the “Adjudicating Authority” at New Delhi, under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which was registered as O.A. No.870/2023.
The Adjudicating Authority on consideration of the matter vide order dated 26-09-2023, had confirmed the order of freezing dated 21-04-2023 passed by the Assistant Director/Authorized Officer, to freeze the account standing in the name of “Virtous Payment Solutions” and “Wonder Enterprises”, maintained with the
The Court affirmed the authority of the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to confirm attachments and the corresponding obligations of banks.
The court established the parameters under which a bank account can be frozen or de-frozen in relation to the Prevention of Money-laundering Act.
Adjudicating authority is empowered by virtue of Section 20(1) of Act of 2002 to direct continuation of freezing of Bank Account.
The Court permits limited operation of bank accounts under legal requisitions while safeguarding the right to challenge future actions.
Point of law: powers of judicial review are limited and while exercising such power the Court has to see whether the process adopted or decision made by the authority is malafideor is intended to fav....
The freezing of a business account requires identification of the tainted amount to ensure proportionality, and blanket freezes violate constitutional protections against arbitrary state action.
The Investigating Officer lacks authority under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. to freeze a bank account absent compliance with Section 102, violating procedural requirements and the petitioner's rights.
Bank to defreeze account retaining lien over disputed cyber fraud amount, permitting operations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure for freezing bank accounts under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, specifically Section 25, is directory in nature....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.