IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Reserved on: 25.11.2025 Pronounced on: 05.12.2025 Uploaded on: 05.12.2025 Whether the operative part or full judgment is pronounced: Full CRM(M) No.64/2021 JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD.

...PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT(S)

Through: - Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Advocate, with Ms. Heena Baqal, Advocate.

Vs.

UT OF J&K AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)

Through: - Mr. G. A. Lone, Advocate, with Mr. Mujeeb Andrab, Advocate, Mr. Mian Muzaffar, Advocate.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1) The Petitioner Bank, through the medium of present petition, has challenged order dated 27.01.2021, passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Anantnag, whereby a direction has been issued to the Petitioner Bank to calculate interest with regard to the instruments/ payment orders in the name of the private respondents as per saving account rates from 31.03.1993 to 25.07.2009 and as per fixed deposit rates of interest from 25.06.2012.

2) It appears that the aforesaid order has been passed by the learned Special Judge while considering the application of the Petitioner Bank seeking modification of order dated 07.03.2020 read with order dated 10.11.2020. The application has been decided along with the application of the private respondents seeking direction upon the Petitioner Bank to calculate the interest as per fixed deposit rates from the date of deposit till final realization.

3) Heard and considered.

4) It appears that the private respondents are facing trial before the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Anantnag, in cases arising out of FIR Nos.10 and 14 to 22 of 1993 registered with Police Station, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir. It also appears that after investigation of the aforesaid FIRs, challans came to be filed before the learned Special Judge, Anticorruption, Anantnag, and the trial in the case is going on. It does appear that during the course of investigation, payment orders were issued by the Petitioner Bank on the basis of WDC bills prepared in favour of the private respondents but the said payment orders were kept on hold/freezed under the orders of the Investigating Agency i.e. Vigilance Organization.

5) It further appears that the private respondents approached the trial court for the release of these freezed payment orders and vide orders dated 16-06-2009 and 30.04.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge Anti-

Corruption, the Petitioner Bank was directed to convert the payment orders into FDRs without any change in the name of holders of the instruments initially for a period of three years. It was further provided that the Bank shall not sanction any loan against these FDRs.

6) It seems that an application came to be filed by the private respondents seeking renewal of the FDRs, which was allowed by the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption vide its order dated 04-05-2019 and it was directed that there shall be auto-renewal of the FDRs mentioned in the said order after every three years till further orders of the court. The other conditions remained unaltered.

7) On 07-03-2022, another order came to be passed by the learned Special Judge on the basis of an application made by the private respondents seeking a direction for calculation of interest on the rates applicable to fixed deposits from the due date of renewal of FDRs. In the said application, a direction was issued upon the Petitioner Bank to calculate the interest as per the fixed deposit rates from the due date of renewal of the FDRs and not as per the saving rate of interest as was calculated by the Petitioner Bank. Another direction came to be passed by the learned Special Judge on 10-11-2020, whereby the Petitioner Bank was directed to submit a compliance report with respect to orders dated 04-05-2019 and 07-03-2020.

8) Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 07-03-2020 and 10-11-2020, the Petitioner Bank filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C bearing CRM(M) No.243/2020, which was disposed of by thi