Freezing an entire bank account for a small disputed amount during a cyber crime investigation is disproportionate and violates the right to livelihood and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

ORAL ORDER

1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for the following reliefs:-

(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to defreeze the bank account of the applicant bearing Account No. 50100252309114 maintained with respondent No.3 HDFC Bank, Infocity Branch, Gandhinagar;

(B) Pending admission and final hearing, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent bank to permit operation of the said account by keeping only the disputed amount of ₹1,100/- on hold;

(C) Any other relief deemed fit in the interest of justice.

2. The factual matrix of the present petition is that the applicant is holding a savings bank account bearing No. 50100252309114 with HDFC Bank, Infocity Branch, Gandhinagar, which is his primary account used for salary, household expenses, rent, EMIs and other day-to-day financial transactions. The said account came to be debit-freezed by respondent No.3 bank pursuant to communications received from cyber crime authorities in connection with complaints bearing Acknowledgment Nos. 31609250128406 and 32909250054174.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no involvement whatsoever in any alleged cyber crime and is neither named as an accused nor as a suspect in any proceedings. It is submitted that the account has been freezed merely, on account of two small credit transactions of ₹ ₹ ₹ 500/- and 600/-, totaling 1,100/-. Despite repeated representations made by the applicant, no detailed reasons or documents have been supplied to him and the entire bank account has been frozen, thereby preventing him from accessing his lawful earnings.

4. Though served, the respondent No.1 and 2 have not appeared.

5. Learned APP appearing for the respondent State submits that the action of freezing the account has been undertaken in connection with cyber crime investigation. Learned advocate for respondent No.3 bank submits that the bank has acted pursuant to the instructions received from the Investigating agency and appropriate orders may be passed by this Court.

6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the material on record.

7. It appears that during the course of investigation in certain cyber crime complaints, it has transpired that certain amounts have been transferred through various bank accounts and the account of the present applicant has been reflected in the transaction trail. The material on record indicates that the alleged suspicious transactions in the present case are limited ₹ ₹ ₹ to 500/- and 600/-, aggregating to 1,100/-. However, on account of such limited transactions, the entire bank account of the applicant has been debit-freezed, thereby restricting access not only to the alleged amount but also to the applicant's legitimate earnings and savings.

8. The power of the investigating agency to direct freezing of bank accounts during the course of investigation cannot be disputed. However, such power is required to be exercised in a reasonable, proportionate and lawful manner. The freezing of an entire bank account without specifying the quantum of suspected amount or without establishing the involvement of the account holder in any criminal activity results in undue hardship and adversely affects the fundamental rights of the citizen.

9. In the present case, the applicant is not shown to be an accused in any criminal proceedings and the alleged suspicious ₹ amount is quantified at 1,100/- only. Freezing of the entire account, including the applicant'