IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS MONDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 14TH MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 1092 OF 2025 PETITIONER:

MOHAMMED ASHIQ CH AGED 24 YEARS S/O: ABDUL AZEEZ, CHALILAKATH HOUSE, PUTHANANGADI, VENGARA P O, DIST:MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676304 BY ADV SADIQALI. M RESPONDENTS:

1 FEDERAL BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, OORAKAM BRANCH, MALIYEKKAL BUILDING VENGARA, OPPOSITE GVHSS, OORAKAM, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN -

676304

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CYBER POLICE STATION RAJASTHAN POLICE ACADEMY ROAD, NEHRU NAGAR, JAIPUR, PIN - 302016

3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CYBER POLICE STATION 2Q2J+W6W, POLICE STAFF COLONY, NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 422002

4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CENTRAL POLICE STATION HYDERGUDA MAIN RD, GUN FOUNDRY, BASHEER BAGH, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA, PIN - 500001

5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, SALEM CITY POLICE CONTROL ROOM BUILDING, LINEMEDU, SALEM, PIN - 636006 STANDING COUNSEL- SRI MOHAN JACOB GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

03.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3^rd day of February, 2025 The writ petition is filed to direct the first respondent bank to lift the debit freezing of the petitioner’s bank accounts bearing Nos.

12940200064908 and 12940100321606.

2. The petitioner is the holder of the above bank account with the first respondent bank. The petitioner’s bank accounts has been debit frozen by the first respondent pursuant to the requisitions received from the police. The action of the first respondent is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Heard; the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that although they have received requisitions from the police, no amount has been mentioned in the requisition. The said submission is recorded.

5. In considering an identical matter, this Court in Dr.Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India [2024 (1)

KLT 826] held as follows:

“ a. The respondent Banks arrayed in these cases, are directed to confine the order of freeze against the accounts of the respective petitioners, only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the order/requisition issued to them by the Police Authorities. This shall be done forthwith, so as to enable the petitioners to deal with their accounts, and transact therein, beyond that limit.

b. The respondent – Police Authorities concerned are hereby directed to inform the respective Banks as to whether freezing of accounts of the petitioners in these Writ Petitions will require to be continued even in the afore manner; and if so, for what further time, within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

c. On the Banks receiving the afore information/intimation from the Police Authorities, they will adhere with it and complete necessary action – either continuing the freeze for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be.

d. If, however, no information or intimation is received by their Banks in terms of directions (b) above, the petitioners or such among them, will be at full liberty to approach this Court again; for which purpose, all their contentions in these Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to them, to impel in future.”

6. Subsequently, this Court in Nazeer K.T v.

Manager, Federal Bank Ltd [2024 KHC OnLine 768], after concurring with the view in Dr.Sajeer's case (supra) and taking into consideration Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023] and the interpretation of Section 102 of the Code laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC 685], Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat [(2018) 2 SCC 372] and Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen and others [2024 SCC OnLine SC 895], has held thus:

“8. The ab