Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.M. MANOJ, J
SYAMAPRAKASH – Appellant
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counsel submission (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. directions extracted (Para 4) |
| 3. section 102 extracted (Para 5) |
| 4. interpretation of forthwith (Para 6) |
| 5. impact of non-compliance (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12 th day of September, 2024 The petitioner is aggrieved by the sudden freezing of his 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 his case in similar manner.
3. Heard both sides.
4. For convenience, the directions in Dr.Sajeer's case (supra) is extracted hereunder:-
“a. The respond
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
