Jurisdiction for writ petitions requires a part of the cause of action to arise within the court's territory, which was not established in this case.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 9th day of February, 2021 S. Manikumar, CJ Instant writ appeal is filed against the judgment dated 04.01.2021 in W.P.(C) No.33768 of 2019, by which, a learned single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition observing thus:

“An order under Section 102 Cr.P.C. issued by Gurgaon Police Station in State of Haryana is under challenge under this writ petition. It is an order passed by a police station in the state of Haryana. The same has to be challenged as per the lux fori and lux loci. The mere fact that the amount outstanding with a bank situated in Kerala will not confer any jurisdiction to challenge the same before this court. Without prejudice to the right of parties to agitate their grievance as per the lux fori and lux loci, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction.”

2. Facts leading to the filing of this appeal are, appellant is the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.33768 of 2019. He is aggrieved by the order passed by the Haryana Police, freezing his current bank account at HDFC Bank, Palakkad Branch, 5th respondent.

3. Appellant/writ petitioner is a resident of Kalmandapam, Palakkad, Kerala, and runs business. He had been a bitcoin (a virtual currency) trader since 2014. He used a current bank account bearing Account No.50200013037821, opened in the 5th respondent bank, Chandranagar Branch in Palakkad, for all the transactions. That bank account has become suddenly inaccessible to the appellant on 17.08.2019, without any prior notice or information. All that was informed by the bank officials to the appellant was that an officer from the Gurgaon Police, Haryana had contacted and told them to freeze the appellant's account. It is unconscionable that the bank even refused to divulge the details of the communication received from the Gurgaon Police.

4. On enquiry over phone, a Police Officer told the appellant that a complaint was received by Gurgaon Police against him for alleged fraudulent transfer of money. The said police personnel also told the appellant that he is indulging in bitcoin trades, which is illegal in India and hence, the police is contemplating further legal actions. He tried to convince the Police Officer that though bitcoin in India is not regulated by any specific law, it is not a banned trade or business either. But, unfortunately his request fell on deaf ears. The Police Officer further clarified that not even an FIR is registered based on the said complaint.

But, he refused to provide names of the complainants, their details etc.

5. Appellant has further stated that despite repeated requests, the

5th respondent bank finally transmitted Exhibit-P6 order passed by the Station House Officer, Cyber Police Station, Haryana, dated 25.07.2019, which states that the Haryana Police has received a Cyber Crime Complaint dated 29.06.2019 that the appellant's bank account has been used to cheat innocent people. It is pertinent to note that the notice is silent as to whether a crime has been registered and that the notice does not disclose any other details regarding the complaint nor does it mention who is the complainant. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed the writ petition for the following reliefs:

i) declare that Exhibit-P6 notice issued by the 3rd respondent is illegal, unconstitutional, and void;

ii) declare that no power subsists under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C, to consider or direct a debit-freeze of bank account by the police personnel and hence, Exhibit-P6 is unauthorised and without the sanction of law;

iii) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing Exhibit-P6 notice issued by the

3rd respondent;

iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, direction or order, commanding the 5th respondent to de-freeze the petitioner's bank account No.50200013037821 held in its Chandranagar Branch, Palakkad;

6. After considering the submissions and materials on record, the writ court dismissed the writ petition, hol