Debit freezing without clear indication of disputed amounts violates legal protections established under relevant statutes and constitutional provisions.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 28^th day of January, 2026 The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the

1.

debit freezing/lien of his Bank account with the Respondent/Bank at the requisition of the Police authorities. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner is not an accused in the Crime registered by the Police Authorities against some other persons, in which the requisition was made; that the Petitioner is in no way connected with the said Crime; and that the debit freezing/lien of the account is in violation of Sections 106 & 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 ( BNSS ) and Article 300A of the Constitution of India .

In spite of service of notice to the Respondent No.4, there

2.

is no appearance for the Respondent No.4. The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Bank, after getting instructions from the Bank, confirmed that the Bank has received the Requisition from the Respondent No.4 for debit freezing of the account of the Petitioner mentioned in the Writ Petition. It is submitted that the disputed amount is not stated in the Requisition. Hence, the Bank has effected debit freezing of the account of the Petitioner.

The issue is covered by the decisions of this Court in Dr.

3.

Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India [ 2024 (1) KLT 826 ], Nazeer K.T. v. Manager, Federal Bank , Makkaraparamba Branch [2024 KHC 768]

and Abhiraj Rajan v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC 1676].

This Court has been consistently issuing the directions

4.

contained in the aforesaid decisions with two other directions for effecting uncommunicated/further requisitions for debit freeze/lien and making the frozen amount at the disposal of the jurisdictional Magistrate’s Court. This Writ Petition is to be disposed of, incorporating the same directions.

Since the Requisition issued by the Police Authorities

5.

does not show the disputed amount, it will be an injustice if the petitioner is totally prevented from operating the Bank Account. The Police Authorities are to be directed to inform the Bank of the disputed amount within a time frame, failing which the petitioner shall be allowed to operate the Bank Account without any restriction.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the

6.

following directions:

The Respondent/Bank is directed to seek, within a period of i)

two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the details of the disputed amount in the Requisition already communicated to the Bank from the Police Authorities, sending a copy of this judgment, and the Police Authorities shall communicate the details of the disputed amount in the Requisition already communicated to the Bank within a period of one month from the date of receipt of communication from the Bank and in case of default by the Police Authorities, the Bank shall lift the freeze/lien imposed on the Petitioner's account.

Immediately on getting knowledge of the details of the disputed ii)

amount from the Police Authorities, the Respondent/Bank shall confine the order of freeze/lien against the account of the Petitioner only to the extent of the disputed amount, and it shall be done immediately, with notice to the Petitioner, so as to enable the Petitioner to deal with his account and transact therein beyond that limit.

The respondents - Police Authorities concerned are hereby iii)

directed to inform the Bank as to whether freezing/lien of the account of the Petitioner will require to be continued even in the aforesaid 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.

On the Bank receiving the aforementioned iv)

information/intimation from the Police Authorities, the Bank will adhere to it and complete necessary action - either continuing the freeze/lien for such perio