Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.PANIGRAHI
Parbati Murmu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges rejection of account closure. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against freezing of accounts based on husband's actions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. right to property under article 300-a discussed. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. opposite party's justification for account freezing. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. court's analysis on authority discretion and account nexus. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. writ petition dismissed without relief. (Para 19 , 20) |
ORDER
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
II. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER
5. It is pertinent to mention that, in the charge sheet, the amount alleged to have been misappropriated by the husband of the petitioner has been stated to be Rs.2,59,040/-. However, in the impugned rejection order, the opposite party No.2 has stated that an amount of Rs.5,64,160/- has been misappropriated which is false and has been stated intentionally to frustrate the prayer of the petitioner to withdraw the total sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the said T.D. accounts. It is further submitted that once the amount alleged to have been misappropriated is mentioned in the charge sheet, investigation stops after the issuing of
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
