Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49249
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANU, J
MUHAMMAD MURSHID C – Appellant
Versus
DHILEEP KUMAR – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1375 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO.45071 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SADIQALI. M, SHRI.MUHAMMAD SABIK, SMT.PRAGEENA A.P., SHRI.MOHAMED SHAFI M
For the Respondents:
The court determined that the respondent bank complied with previous orders and thus no contempt was established.
Headnote:This case involves the contempt jurisdiction of the High Court concerning a petitioner whose bank account had been frozen. The court found that the bank complied with earlier orders regarding the account and that subsequent actions led to a new freeze. Findings concluded a lack of contempt jurisdiction, allowing the petitioner to seek remedies legally. The court stated, 'Accordingly, this contempt case is closed.'
J U D G M E N T
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the bank had complied with the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.45071 of 2024. The freezing on the petitioner’s account was lifted in April 2024 and the account was fully operational. Thereafter another requisition was received from yet another Police authority who was not a party to W.P.(C) No.45071 of 2025. In view of the subsequent requisition, the bank had to impose freezing once again on the account of the petitioner.
In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent it is clear that no case for proceeding the contempt jurisdiction is made out in this matter.
Accordingly, this contempt case is closed. However, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue remedies in accordance with law as again freezing has been imposed.
