Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J
Mukesh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CW / 5715 / 2025
Decided On : 12-03-2025
(A) Banking Regulation Act - Section 35A - Cyber Crime - Writ petition for de-freezing bank account - Petitioner claims no misuse of account and willingness to cooperate with investigations - Bank account frozen due to cyber complaints - Court orders de-freezing of account except for disputed amount of Rs.43,254/- involved in fraudulent transaction. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 7)
(B) Legal cooperation - Petitioner directed to cooperate with Bank Authorities and Investigating Agencies - Court emphasizes that if found involved in illegal transactions, the petitioner will face legal consequences. (Paras 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition asserting that he has not misused his bank account and is willing to cooperate with investigations. The bank account was frozen following complaints related to cyber crimes. The petitioner seeks to operate his account except for the disputed amount.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the bank to de-freeze the petitioner’s account while freezing only the disputed amount, emphasizing the petitioner’s obligation to cooperate with investigations.
Issues: The main issues involved the legality of freezing the bank account and the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner must cooperate with the investigation and that the bank account could be de-frozen for legitimate transactions, reinforcing the principle of due process in banking regulations.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.
Order :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the prayers as indicated in the writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never misused his bank account for the purpose of illegal transactions and has not committed any cyber crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Agencies and will appear before the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies as and when called upon. He, therefore, prays that the disputed amount which has been received in petitioner’s account may be freezed but, the amount other than the disputed amount may be allowed to be withdrawn. He further prays that the petitioner may be allowed to operate his bank account for the transaction of money.
4. Per contra learned counsel for the respondent- Bank submits that the bank account of the petitioner has been freezed in pursuance of complaint No. MHA-21606240028730 and Cyber Complaint No.30806240022417. Learned counsel for the respondent- Bank also submits that till the matter is pending investigation, the bank account of the petitioner may not be closed and he my be directed not to discontinue the bank account until the investigation is completed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is agreeable with the submissions made by counsel for the respondent- Bank.
6. In view of the submission made before this Court, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Bank to de-freeze the bank account No.50100649724707 of HDFC Bank Ltd. of the petitioner and he may be allowed to operate the transaction in his bank account, freezing only the amount of Rs.43,254/- which is allegedly involved in a fraudulent transaction. 7. It is made clear that the petitioner will co-operate with the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies and will appear before them as and when required. It is also ordered that the petitioner shall not close or discontinue his bank account till the Investigating Agencies and Bank Authorities permit the petitioner to do so. It is further ordered that after the investigation if the petitioner is found involved in any illegal transaction, he shall be liable to pay the amount involved in the illegal transaction and will face the enquiry/investigation as per the law. It is further ordered that the respondent-Bank will be free to transfer the disputed amount from the account of the petitioner to the account from which it has been transferred in his account.
8. Stay petition and other pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
The court ruled that a bank account can be de-frozen for legitimate transactions while freezing disputed amounts involved in alleged fraud, provided the account holder cooperates with investigations.
A bank account may be de-frozen and operated by the account holder during an investigation, provided they cooperate with authorities and only disputed amounts are frozen.
The court ruled that a bank account can be de-frozen while allowing transactions, provided the account holder cooperates with ongoing investigations.
The court affirmed the right to operate a bank account while addressing concerns related to ongoing investigations into alleged cyber crime, emphasizing cooperation with authorities.
The court affirmed the right to operate non-disputed funds in a bank account while cooperating with ongoing investigations into alleged fraudulent transactions.
Freezing a bank account requires just cause and evidence; the petitioner must be allowed to operate their account barring disputed funds.
The court affirmed that a bank account should not be unjustly frozen without evidence of wrongdoing, allowing the petitioner to operate his account while restricting only the disputed amount.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
