$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4280/2025 & CRL.M.A. 18662/2025 AXIS BANK LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Malak Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Nagpal and Ms. Somya Saxena, Advocates versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Vikas Rathee, P.S. Cyber Ms. Shagufa Salim, Mr. Jatin Choudhary, Mr. Suchit, Mr. Hariom and Ms. Sandhya, Advocates for the Complainant with Complainant in person CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 02.12.2025

1. Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.N.S.S.’) seeking quashing of the Order dated 03.06.2025 passed by the learned CJM, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi qua the Petitioner.

2. Briefly stated, the Petitioner, Axis Bank Limited, is an Indian Multinational banking and financial services Company having its branch office at 3/20, K.K. Banerjee Road, Lal Dighi, Baharampur, West Bengal, 742101.

3. It maintained Account No. 924020052391652 in the name of one Nawshin Enterprise at this Branch. On 24.03.2025, the Petitioner was served with statutory Directions under Section 94/106 BNSS by the Cyber Crime Police, Puducherry and Delhi respectively, requiring the Bank to mark a lien and freeze the aforementioned account in connection with the ongoing investigations into serious cyber offences and impersonation.

4. Thereafter, the learned CJM, Puducherry, vide Order dated 28.03.2025 in Cr. M.P. No. 1385/2025 directed the Petitioner to transfer a sum of Rs. 1,97,00,000/- from the aforesaid account, to victim’s ICICI Bank account. This Order was reiterated on 26.05.2025, by the learned CJM, Puducherry, thereby reaffirming that the said payment be made. In compliance thereto, the directed amount was transferred, leaving a total balance of Rs. 5,12,000/- by the end of May 2025, in the said Account.

5. In the meanwhile, on 03.04.2025, the learned CJM, West District, Delhi passed an Order, directing the Petitioner to transfer Rs. 5,00,000/-

from the very same Account, to another complainant/victim.

6. Subsequently, a similar Order dated 24.05.2025 was passed by the learned Special JMFC, LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana in FIR No. 429/2025 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2) of the BNS and Section 66D of the IT Act, directing the Petitioner to transfer Rs.

3,90,000/- to another Complainant upon furnishing of a surety bond.

7. It is stated by the Bank that the cumulative directions from various Courts across India, totalled to over Rs. 2.05 Crores. Therefore, it is impossible for the Bank to honour the concurrent directions.

8. Simultaneously, formal communications dated 27.05.2025 and 02.06.2025 were issued by the Petitioner to Puducherry Police and Cyber Crime Police, West District, Delhi, respectively, enclosing records of prior compliance with the Orders of the learned CJM, Puducherry, the detailed transaction of Rs. 1.97 Crore, and the available balance and lien on the account in question. These emails are stated to be part of the Petitioner’s continuing duty to cooperate with the investigating Agency.

9. In view of the aforesaid, the Petitioner approached the learned CJM, West District, Delhi by way of a clarification/modification Application dated May 2025 wherein it was stated that the directions for transfer of money to the victim’s Account, could not be acted upon on account of pre- existing Attachment orders and absence of requisite NOC from the originating authorities.

10. However, the ld. CJM Delhi, vide the impugned Order dated 03.06.2025, disposed of the Application without recording any of the submissions of the Petitioner, reasoning, or any reference to the record, reiterating the earlier direction and effectively imposing a mandate which was impossible to comply.

11. The impugned Order is challenged on the ground that the learned Tis Hazari Court was duly informed regarding Statutory Notices which had been issued under Sect