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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3056

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
M/s. Balaji Infra Buildtech & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO.10019 of 2023
Decided On : 28-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sandhya Gaur, Advocate; For the Petitioners
For the Respondent: Ms. Lavanya Paul, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Birinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for Mr. A.P.S. Shergill, Advocate, for Respondent No.4.
Mr. Shivoy Dhir, Advocate, and Mr. Samrit Gill, Advocate, for for Respondent No.5

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 102 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) - Freezing of bank accounts - Petitioners challenged communications ordering freezing of their bank accounts during an ongoing investigation related to financial irregularities linked with public officials - Court found failure to establish justifiable grounds for freezing the accounts without compelling evidence of ongoing investigation impact - Section 102 not applicable in circumstances where evidence has been gathered and accounts do not pose a threat to investigation. (Paras 15, 25)

(B) Legal Principles - The power under Section 102 to freeze accounts must be based on suspicion tied directly to available evidence and not merely on apprehension of influencing witnesses or impeding investigation; previously established grounds must justify the continued freeze of accounts. (Paras 17, 22)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged orders that resulted in freezing their business bank accounts over allegations involving their association with an accused public official charged with corruption and financial misconduct, but the court ruled that the orders lacked sufficient grounding under the law.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled to unfreeze the petitioners' accounts, stating that no valid or compelling justification existed to continue the freeze since the necessary evidence was already collected by authorities.

Issues: The main issues addressed include whether the freezing of accounts under Section 102 was justifiable given the circumstances that the investigating agency had sufficient evidence already, and whether the court could intervene to restore operational status to the accounts.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that merely freezing accounts cannot be justified without ongoing substantive evidence of potential tampering with investigations and that the status of the accounts had to align proportionally with the needs of the investigation.

Result: Writ petition allowed; orders freezing accounts set aside.

Table of Content
1. challenge against freezing of bank accounts due to alleged corruption. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. arguments regarding the validity and necessity of freezing accounts. (Para 11 , 12 , 21 , 24)
3. court observations on the appropriateness of freezing assets. (Para 14 , 16 , 17 , 22 , 23)
4. interpretation of section 102 cr.p.c. on seizing accounts. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
5. conclusion allowing the writ petition and setting aside freezing orders. (Para 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present petition is to the communication/order bearing Memo Nos. 67 & 68 dated 12.04.2023 whereby an order under Section 102 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 has been sent by the Vigilance Bureau, Punjab directing the Branch Manager of the HDFC Bank, Ward No.09, Chandigarh Road, Kurali, S.A.S Nagar, Mohali & Branch Manager, AXIS Bank, Kurali, SAS Nagar to freeze the Bank Accounts of the petitioner. The extract of the aforesaid communications reads thus:-

    "No. 67 dated 12.04.2023

    Subject:- Request for freezing the bank accounts.

    That a case FIR No. 18, Dated 12.10.2022, under Section 13 (1) (b) r/w 13(2), PC Act 1988 as amendment by PC (Amendment) Act 2018 and 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120- B IPC, PS Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad-1, Punjab at Mohali was registered against Girish Verma s/o Manohar Lal Verma & Others.

    2. During investigation, it has surfaced that accused Vikas Verma & others partners/ firm have unexplained inter-se suspicious financial transactions. These persons are holding account(s) with your bank. The circumstances of the case and perusal of transaction statements of the accounts of the accused persons clearly points towards commission of offence. The details of the bank account(s) are as following:-

S.No.

Account Holder

Account No.

1.

Balaji Infra Buildtech

50200037648489

2.

Ashu Goyal

13711000008442

3.

Gaurav Gupta

13711600001392

    3. You are hereby requested to kindly freeze the above mentioned bank account(s) and prohibit the account holder(s) from operating these account(s) till any further directions of the concerned Hon'ble Court.

    "No. 68 dated 12.04.2023

    Subject:- Request for freezing the bank accounts.

    That a case FIR No. 18, Dated 12.10.2022, under Section 13 (1) (b) r/w 13(2), PC Act 1988 as amendment by PC (Amendment) Act 2018 and 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, PS Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad-1, Punjab at Mohali was registered against Girish Verma s/o Manohar Lal Verma & Others.

    2. During investigation, it has surfaced that accused Vikas Verma & others have unexplained inter-se suspicious financial transactions within themselves and with the firm. This firm is holding account(s) with your bank. The circumstances of the case and perusal of transaction statements of the accounts of the accused persons firm clearly points towards commission of offence. The details of the bank account(s) are as following:-

    S.No.

    Account Holder

    Account No.

    1.

    Balaji Developers

    920020025419770

    3. You are hereby requested to kindly freeze the above mentioned bank account and prohibit the account holder(s) from operating this account till any further directions of the concerned Hon'ble Court."

2. Briefly summarized, the facts of the case are that the petitioner firms which are duly registered with the Registrar of Firms vide Certificate of Registration bearing No.240 of 2019-2020 dated 16.04.2019 and No.2820 of 2021 dated 03.03.2021 have approached this Court challenging the above said communications. It is averred that Vigilance Enquiry No.01 dated 25.07.2022 culminated into case FIR No.18 dated 12.10.2022 for commission of offence under section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended and for offences under Sections 420 , 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE was registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Flying Squad-I, Punjab, at Mohali. The complainant in the said case happens to be one Assist

                  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