Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
V. G. Arun, J
RAHENA – Appellant
Versus
CANARA BANK PANAMARAM – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counsel for petitioner (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. directions in dr.sajeer's case (Para 4) |
| 3. scrutinizing applicable provisions (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. delay in reporting (Para 7) |
| 5. directions issued by the court (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2024 The petitioner is aggrieved by the sudden freezing of her account by the bank based on requisitions/intimation received from the police. The police in turn has acted on the basis of Cyber Crime Incident Reports filed by persons subjected to online financial fraud/UPI fraud.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court in Dr.Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India [ 2024 (1) KLT 826 ] has addressed the plight of similarly situated persons, and after elaborately dealing with the revolutionary change in money transactions with the advent of Unified Payment Interface (UPI for short), as also the positives and negatives of UPI transactions in the context of Cyber crimes and Online fraud, the writ petitions were disposed of with certain directions. The petitioner is also seeking disposal of her case in similar manner.
3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the bank.
4. For convenien
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
