##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23578

CRL.P No. 6245 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6245 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

AXIS BANK LTD

A BANKING COMPANY.

CARRYING ON THE BANKING BUSINESS

UNDER THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949.

INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956

AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 'TRISHUL'.

3^RD FLOOR, OPP: SAMARTHESHWAR TEMPLE.

LAW GARDEN. ELLIS BRIDGE.

AHMEDABAD - 380 006, GUJARAT

AND HAVING ONE OF ITS BRANCH

OFFICE AT UR HOUSE, 1056-C,

GROUND FLOOR, AVINASHI ROAD,

Digitally COIMBATORE - 641 037.

signed by

SANJEEVINI J

KARISHETTY

REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH HEAD,

Location: High

Court of MR. DINESH KUMARK

Karnataka

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

ALSO AT

S/O KUMARESAN, SITE WO 14.

KRISHNA SWAMY NAGAR,

NEAR ALAYAM AVENUE VELLORE

COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU - 641 111

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE)

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23578

CRL.P No. 6245 of 2026

HC-KAR

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

WEST CEN CRIME POLICE STATION,

WEST DIVISION, BANGALORE DISTRICT.

REPRESENTED BY SPP

HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

BANGALORE - 01.

2. MR. RAM PRASAD.D,

S/O. B.DEVARAJ,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

RESIDING AT 1019,

OPP: BALAKRISHNA RANGA MANDIR,

BENGALURU - 560 098, KARNATAKA.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528

BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 13.02.2026,

PASSED BY THE HONBLE 47TH ACJM, BANGALORE, IN

CR.NO.36/2026, i.e, ANNEXURE-C IN TERMS OF WHICH, THE

PETITIONER IS DIRECTED TO DEFREEZE THE SAVINGS/

CURRENT ACCOUNT BEARING NO.923020009204733

MAINTAINED IN THE PETITIONERS BANK AND TRANSFER THE

SAME TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE RESPONDENT NO.2 i.e

BEARING NO.03121130000147, HDFC BANK, BANGALORE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23578

CRL.P No. 6245 of 2026

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri Unnikrishnan M., learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State

Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that in all identical cases coordinate benches have

allowed the petitions and remitted the matter back to the office

of the learned Magistrate to permit the petitioner to file his

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

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:23578

CRL.P No. 6245 of 2026

HC-KAR

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

t