SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Ker) 271

K.HARIPAL
Ashok Kumar B – Appellant
Versus
Indian Overseas Bank Edathua Branch – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: S.Sanal Kumar, Bhavana Velayudhan, T.J.Seema, Advs.
For the Respondent: Sunil Shanker, Government Pleader Farha Mather, Sr.PP, Sri. Hrithwik C.S.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court held that freezing of a bank account requires a reasonable nexus between the alleged crime and the funds in the account (!) - The petitioner’s account was personal, consisting of retirement benefits, with no connection to the alleged crimes, leading to quashing the freezing order and directing de-freezing (!) - The decision references the principle established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding the nexus requirement for freezing accounts (!) - The petitioner was accused in Crimes Nos. 547, 548, 549 of 2020 and the account freezing occurred during investigation (!) - The Bank’s Ext.P2 notification to freeze the account was challenged via Article 226 petition (!) - The court allowed the writ petition, quashing Ext.P2 and granting relief to operate the account freely (!)

How to determine a reasonable nexus between alleged crime and funds in a bank account for freezing during criminal investigations?

What is the outcome when there is no reasonable nexus between the alleged crime and the funds in the account?

What are the rights of a petitioner to de-freeze a personal bank account linked to retirement benefits in a criminal case?


JUDGMENT :

Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.547, 548 and 549 of 2020 of Edathua police station, which were registered under Sections 406, 420, 120B, read with 34 of the IPC. During the course of investigation, the personal account of the petitioner was frozen by means of intimation given by the respondent. Ext.P2 communication was sent by the Manager of the Indian Overseas Bank, intimating him that the account stands frozen. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the following reliefs :

1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P2.

2. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to permit the petitioner to operate his bank account with the 1st respondent bank freely and without any interruption and to honour the request for withdrawal, transfer or otherwise dealing with the deposits standing to the credit of his account.

2. The SHO, Edathua police station has filed a statement also. Later the petitioner produced Annexures P3 and P4 documents showing details of the bank transaction.

3. The specific case of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top