IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.PANIGRAHI, J.
Datum Micro Credit, Gundichar Nagar, Ganjam – Petitioner
Versus
State Bank of India and Ors. – Opp. Parties
W.P.(C) No.5451 of 2022
Decided On : 23-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to bank account freezing (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against freezing authority (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court analysis on authority under cr.p.c. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. order to allow withdrawal and operate account (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges the action of Opposite Party-Bank in freezing petitioner's Bank Account bearing No-00000034307905193 based on a notice issued under Section 91 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the IIC, Golanthara P.S, Berhampur. The Petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the Opposite Parties/Bank to allow him to withdraw the amount of Rs.12,71,324.95/- kept on hold in its Bank Account bearing No-00000034307905193 in State Bank of India, Konisi Branch.
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the substratum of matter presented before this Court remain that Datum Micro Credit is a company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 and is a service provider (SP) for State Bank of India. Pursuant of agreement dated 29.09.2020 (Annexure-1), petitioner/company has been providing manpower services to the State Bank of India. It is pertinent to mention that the Petitioner company has not been arrayed as an accused in Golanthara P.S. Case No-122/2016, 202/2018 and 21/2019. There is no notice issued by the Investigating Officer of Golanthara vide P.S Case No- 122/2016, 202/2018 and 21/2019 to the petitioner either under Section 91 of Cr.P.C or under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. Bank Account bearing No-00000034307905193 stands in the name of petitioner's company and deals with GST and salary amount of staffs supplied by the petitioner's company.
3. While matter stood thus, pursuant to a notice dtd.17.09.2021 and 04.10.2021 (Annexure-4 Series) under Section 91 Cr.P.C, issued by the Investigating officer of Golanthara P.S Case No-122/2016, 202/2018 and 21/2019 to the Opp. Party, Bank Accounts Bearing No-00000034307905193 and 00000034307909834 were freezed. Petitioner had filed WP(C) No.30070 of 2021 before this Court with a prayer to defreeze both the Bank Accounts. By order dated 30.11.2021, this Court disposed of the aforesaid Writ Petition on the basis of submissions made by the learned counsel for the Bank, allowing the petitioner to operate Bank Account bearing No 0000034307905193 keeping frozen therein a sum of Rs.12,71,324.95/-. Liberty was granted to petitioner to file afresh upon conclusion of the enquiry or investigation and result thereof, if petitioner has relief for remedy there against, available in law. As the frozen amount includes three months GST amount and staff salary amount, petitioner by its letter dated 15.12.2021 (Annexure-2) requested the Bank to allow him to withdraw the frozen amount so that petitioner's company will be able to deposit the GST amount and pay the salary amount of his staffs.
4. In reply to the request letter, the Opp. Party/ Bank by its letter dtd.11.01.2022 (Annexure-3) intimated that amount of Rs.12,71,324.95/- has been kept on hold as per the order of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P.(C) No.30070 of 2021 and the request for withdrawal can't be acceded to. Finding no other alternative, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court on 23.02.2022 for issuance of a direction to the Opp. Party/ Bank to allow him to withdraw the amount of Rs.12,71,324.95/- kept on hold in Bank Account No- 00000034307905193.
II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
5. It is submitted by Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., the Investigating Officer summons the person to produce the document or other thing. On the summons issued under Cr.P.C Bank Account cannot be freezed. Admittedly Bank Account bearing No- 00000034307905193 stands in the name of petitioner's company i.e., "Datum Micro Credit". Petitioner's company i.e. Datum Micro Credit is not an accused in Golanthara P.S C
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.
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.
Compliance with legal provisions, such as Section 91 Cr.P.C., Section 102 Cr.P.C., and Section 14(1) of the Gangsters Act, is essential before freezing a bank account.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to follow the procedure laid down under Sec. 102 Cr.P.C and the need for sufficient evidence to support the freezing of a bank acco....
Seizure of assets under S.102 CrPC requires compliance with statutory provisions and cannot be based solely on suspicion.
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.