The legality of freezing bank accounts demands procedural due diligence and clear communication between law enforcement and financial institutions.

JUDGMENT

The Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by freezing of his account maintained with the Mathura Road Branch of the HDFC Bank. On enquiry the petitioner came to know that action was taken by the Bank on the basis of requisition received from the 4^th respondent. Details regarding freezing of the account was obtained by the petitioner. The same has been produced as Exhibit P2. Aggrieved by the action taken against him, the petitioner approached this Court. 2. On 20.06.2025, the writ petition was admitted and an interim order was passed directing the debit freeze on the petitioner’s account shall be confined to the lien marked/disputed amount mentioned in the requisition received by the Bank.

3. The learned Government Pleader appeared for the 1^st respondent. The learned Standing Counsel appeared for the 3^rd respondent. Notice was issued and duly served on respondents 4 and 5. Notice issued to the 2^nd respondent was not returned. However, taking into account the contentions raised in this writ petition and the directions proposed to be issued, I am of the view that service of notice on the 2^nd respondent can be dispensed with.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for HDFC Bank on instructions submitted that, the action was taken on the basis of requisition received from the 5^th respondent and the disputed amount is Rs.1,77,756/-

5. As there is no appearance for respondents 4 and 5, despite service of notice, the writ petition is dispose with the following directions:

(i) The 3^rd respondent Bank is directed to con freezing of the petitioner's bank account only to the extent of the amount mentioned in the order/requisition issued by the Police Authorities. This shall be done forthwith, so as to enable the petitioner to transact through his account beyond the said limit;

(ii) The Police Authorities concerned are hereby directed to inform the Bank as to whether freezing of the petitioner's account will be required to be continued even in the aforesaid manner; and if so, for how long;

(iii) On the Bank receiving the aforesaid information/intimation from the Police Authorities, they shall comply with it and complete necessary action - either continuing the freezing or lien for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be;

(iv) The police officers concerned shall inform the Bank whether the seizure of the amount in the bank account has been reported to the jurisdictional Magistrate and if not, the time limit within which the seizure will be reported. If no intimation as to the compliance or the proposal to comply with Section 106 of the BNSS is received by the Bank within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the Bank shall lift the debit freeze or remove the lien, as the case may be, on the petitioner's bank account;

(v) In order to enable the Police to comply with the above direction, the Bank, as well as the petitioner, shall forthwith serve a copy of this judgment to the police officer concerned and retain proof of such service.

6. It is clarified that the police authority concerned shall be at liberty to approach this Court to seek review of this judgment if required.

7. The respondent Bank is not precluded from freezing or imposing lien on the petitioner's account on receipt of any subsequent requests/ orders from any law enforcing agencies or courts.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.