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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21971

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna, J
Axis Bank Ltd – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
CRL.P No. 15947 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Unnikrishnan M.
For the Respondents: Channappa Erappa, P Chandrashekar

A bank must be afforded an opportunity of hearing before a Magistrate orders the defreezing and transfer of funds from a customer's account to a complainant to prevent execution difficulties arising from insufficient funds or conflicting orders from multiple courts.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure - Release of Frozen Accounts - Opportunity of Hearing - Directing a bank to defreeze and transfer funds without hearing the bank is impermissible, particularly where multiple orders may exist across different jurisdictions or funds in the account are insufficient to satisfy the order. (Para 4, 7)

(B) Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Financial institutions must be afforded an opportunity to present their objections before a court passes an order for the transfer of funds from a customer's account to a complainant to ensure the order is executable. (Para 7)

Issues: Whether the bank should be given an opportunity of hearing before an order is passed to defreeze and transfer funds from a customer's account to a complainant.

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15947 OF 2025

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NORTH EAST CEN CRIME POLICE STATION

NORTH EAST DIVISION, BANGALORE DISTRICT.

PRESENTED BY SPP HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.

BANGALORE 01.

2. MRS ARUNA N W/O. SURENDRA KUMAR

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.35

ADITYA ENCLAVE LAYOUT VIJAYAPURA MAIN ROAD

DEVANAHALLI BENGALURU CITY 562 110.

KARNATAKA …RESPONDENTS

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C (UNDER SECTION 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE 45th ACJM, BANGALORE IN CR.NO.26/2025 i.e., ANNEXURE-C IN TERMS OF WHICH THE PETITIONER IS DIRECTED TO DEFREEZE THE SAVINGS/CURRENT ACCOUNT BEARING NO.924020022010684 MAINTAINED IN THE PETITIONERS BANK AND TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE RESPONDENT NO.2.

THIS CRL.P IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri M Unnikrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Channappa Erappa, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri P Chandrashekar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in all identical cases, the co-ordinate Benches have allowed the petitions and remitted the matter back to the office of the learned Magistrate to permit the petitioners to file their objections with liberty to appear and then consider applications filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

3. I deem it appropriate to quote the orders so passed in Crl.P.No.1787/2023 dated 14.12.2023:

ORDER

The Petitioner which is a Financial Institution is before this Court challenging the order passed by 1st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on an application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. by the complainant/respondent No.2 directing the petitioner-Bank to defreeze the amount belonging to the accused and transfer the said amount to the bank account of the complainants/respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner’s concern is that the order passed by the Jurisdictional Magistrate cannot be executed because it surpasses the specified release amount, and numerous courts across the Country have issued directives to the investigating agencies to unfreeze the bank accounts of the accused therein.

3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor on instructions would suggest that the matter may be remanded to the Jurisdictional Courts to consider the application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. afresh, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. Admittedly, multiple cases are registered against the accused herein within the State and across the country and there are multiple orders passed by the Jurisdictional Magistrates directing the petitioner to unfreeze the account of the accused and transfer the amount to the bank account of the complainants. The passing of multiple orders has caused difficulty to the petitioner/bank in executing the said order, since the amount ordered to be released in some accounts exceeds the amount available in the subject accounts of the accused. Therefore, the learned Magistrate before passing an order directing the petitioner to unfreeze and transfer the amount to the accounts of the complainants, is required to hear the petitioner. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. Criminal Petition is allowed

ii. The order dated 26.11.2021 passed by the 1st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in Cr.No.452/2021 is hereby set aside.

iii. Matter is remanded to 1st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru to reconsider the application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. afresh, after giving the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

iv. Till the application is disposed of, the petitioner/bank is restrained from releasing the money in favour of any person from the subject acco

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