IMPORTANT POINT
IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized responsible banking practices in freezing accounts based on police requests and reinforced judicial oversight in such matters.

ORDER :

PRANAY VERMA, J.

1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs:

"7.1 Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari, thereby calling for the entire records pertaining to the freezing of the Petitioner’s bank account from the office of the - Respondent, for the purpose of judicial scrutiny;

7.2 Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, thereby directing respondent to forthwith lift the hold/freeze imposed on the Petitioner’s bank account and restore the said account to regular operational status;

7.3 Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, directing the Respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation/objection in accordance with law, after affording the petitioner an effective opportunity of hearing;

7.4 To allow this petition with costs;

7.5 To pass any such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case to grant relief to the petitioner, in the interest of justice."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others passed in W.P. No.1100 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024.

3. So far as the decision rendered in the case of Malcolm Murayis (supra) is concerned, the same reads as under:-

"1] This order shall also govern the disposal of W.P. Nos.1100/2024 and 1185/2024 as in both the petitions identical reliefs have been sought by the parties.

2] These petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) This petition may kindly be allowed with cost.

b) To direct the Respondent No. 2 thereby directing Respondents to remove the hold/freeze on the Bank account of petitioners.

c) Issue such other orders, writ, and direction as this Hon’ble court deems fit in the interest of justice in favour of petitioner.”

3] The grievance of the petitioners is that they are engaged in trading of crypto and virtual currency, and having their bank accounts with State Bank of India and ICICI Bank, which have been freezed all of a sudden, only on the intimation sent by the cyber cells of the various police stations, viz., respondent Nos.3 to 9, to freeze the aforesaid account on the allegation that the accounts are involved in some cyber fraud. The amounts of which have also been disclosed, as to how much of the amount is credited in the account of the petitioners, which are linked to cyber crime/fraud.

4] Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have never received any notice from any police station regarding their involvement in any such offence, and even otherwise, they are lawfully carrying out their business of trading, and it appears that some person who was involved in fraud has transacted through the petitioners. Thus, it is submitted that the petitioners may be allowed to operate their bank account, and so far as the amount which is said to be credited on account of the cyber fraud, it is submitted that it may be kept in separate fixed deposits so that the same can be withdrawn as and when the clean chit is given to the petitioner. Counsel has also submitted that none of the investigating agencies have complied with Section 102 of Cr.P.C. and have not informed the concerned Magistrate about such seizure. Thus, it is submitted that the petition be allowed.

5] Counsel for the respondents Banks have submitted that the Banks have not freezed the account of the petitioners on their own but only at the instructions of various cyber cell police stations,