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

2025 Supreme(HP) 1132

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Kewal Krishan - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 447 of 2025 
Decided On : 18-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General.

Pension funds are exempt from attachment under law, protecting a pensioner's right to access necessary funds despite legal proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 438 and 442 - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 451 - The petitioner sought the defreezing of a bank account to access pension funds, frozen due to allegations of involvement in a financial crime. The trial court dismissed the application, failing to consider the essential nature of pension funds. (Paras 12, 15, 17)

(B) Exemption of Pension - The court highlighted that pensions are exempt from attachment under Section 11 of the Pension Act, 1871, and Section 60(1)(g) of the Code of Civil Procedure, ensuring pensioners can access their funds irrespective of other legal proceedings. (Paras 15, 16)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, an accused in a financial crime case, could not access his frozen bank account containing his pension, impacting his day-to-day life. The police argued the account had been used for proceeds of crime.

Findings of Court:
The court ordered the release of the pension amount, as it cannot be frozen under the law, directing the petitioner to arrange for his pension to be credited to another account.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the legality of freezing the bank account containing pension funds and the proper application of pension protection laws.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that pension funds are protected from legal actions concerning other debts, reaffirming the imperative of safeguarding pensioner’s rights.

Result: The petition was disposed of with a specific direction regarding pension funds.

JUDGMENT : 

Virender Singh, J.

Petitioner – Kewal Krishan, has filed the present petition, under Section 438/442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), against the order dated 20.11.2024, passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court), in Application No.2162/2024, in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2024, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Chander Mohan & Others.

2. Vide order dated 20.11.2024, the learned trial Court has dismissed the application, filed by the Kewal Krishan (petitioner), under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.PC), by holding that the same is not maintainable.

3. As per the record, petitioner Kewal Krishan, who has been impleaded, as one of the accused, in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2024, arising out of FIR No. 266 of 2023, dated 19.10.2023, registered with Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and Sections 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019.

4. By way of the said application, a prayer has been made that the petitioner and his wife are having joint Saving Account, bearing No.20045958019, with State Bank of India, Amb Branch, Una. The said bank account was freezed, by the Police, in the above titled case. As such, the petitioner could not make any transaction in the said account.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a pensioner and his Department credits the pension to the said account, but, due to the fact that his account has been freezed, the petitioner is unable to withdraw the amount of pension, in order to meet his day- to-day expenditure.

6. According to the petitioner, investigation, in the present case, is complete and no useful purpose would be served by freezing the bank account.

7. On the basis of the above facts, the petitiner has prayed, before the learned trial Court, that the application may kindly be allowed and the above bank account may kindly be ordered to be defreezed.

8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 19.10.2023, Rajesh Saini, son of Dev Raj Saini, moved a complaint, disclosing therein, that he has been cheated of Rs.12,60,390/- by Ramesh Chauhan, Rohit, Rajinder Sood, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar through qtrade9.com,qfx.co.in. and QFX Trade Limited Company.
8.1. According to the complainant, in the year 2022, Rohit and Ramesh came to him and explained him about the QFX Trade Limited Company. According to them, their company is investing the amount in FOREX (online digital platform) and they used to get 5% return of the amount invested.
8.2. Being impressed from them, he has deposited a sum of Rs.12,60,390/- in the account given by them bearing Account No. 520481028803179 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk and Account No. 203915140000019 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk. At the insistence of Rohit and Ramesh Chauhan, he has held a meeting with the Directors of the Company namely, Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar. The above named persons are stated to be receiving the money from the people on the pretext of good returns and they used to cheat the people. They have also established their office in Ner Chowk. The complainant, as well as, other persons have been apprised about the investment plan of 11 months. Thereafter, they have assured the return by way of cheque. On their assurance, number of persons have invested huge amount. The amount, invested by the complainant, was used by them, but, no amount has been returned to him. They have given him post dated cheques, but, the account, out of which, those cheques were issued, was found to be blocked.
8.3. The complainant has further alleged, in the complaint, that they had collected the money by cheating and alluring them to return a good amount. Rajinder Sood, res






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 Back to top