The court reinforced the necessity for adherence to procedural safeguards in criminal investigations, particularly regarding the freezing of assets.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 28^th day of January, 2026

1. These three Writ Petitions are filed by the same person seeking direction to the Respondent Bank to de-freeze his account maintained with the Respondent Bank. Communications from the Bank show that requisitions are received from the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.28363/2025 and the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C)

No.32448/2025.

2. Ext.P2 dated 13.01.2025 issued by the Bank produced in W.P.(C) No.28363 of 2025 shows the requisition for lien for an amount of Rs.19,530/- from the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.28363/2025. Ext.P4 dated 22.08.2025 issued by the Bank produced in W.P.(C) No.37185 of 2025 shows that the Bank has received a requisition from the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.32448/2025 in which the amount of debit freeze is not stated. Ext.P2 dated 20.08.2025 issued by the Bank produced in W.P.(C) No.37185 of 2025 shows that the Bank has received requisitions from the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.28363/2025 and the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.32448/2025 for Rs.19,530/- and Rs.4,092/- respectively. As per Interim Order dated 21.01.2026, the Counsel for the Respondent Bank was directed to verify whether Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.37185 of 2025 is the composite intimation for Ext.P4 in W.P.(C) No.37185 of 2025 and Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.28363 of 2025 and the learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank confirmed the same. Hence, I hold that the lien amounts in the requisitions from the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.28363/2025 and the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) No.32448/2025 as Rs.19,530/- and Rs.4,092/-

respectively.

3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

i) The Respondent/Bank is directed to confine the order of freeze/lien against the account of the Petitioner only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the orders/requisitions issued to the Bank by the Police Authorities, and it shall be done forthwith so as to enable the Petitioner to deal with his account and transact therein beyond that limit.

ii) The respondents - Police Authorities concerned are hereby 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.

iii) On the Bank receiving the aforesaid information/intimation from the Police Authorities, the Bank will adhere to it and complete necessary action - either continuing the freeze/lien for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be.

iv) If, however, no information or intimation is received by the Bank in terms of direction (ii) above, the Petitioner will be at full liberty to approach this Court again; for which purpose, all his contentions in the Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to him, to impel in the future.

v) The Police Officer concerned shall inform the Bank whether the seizure of 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 102 Cr.P.C. (Section 106 BNSS) is informed to the Bank within three months of receipt of a copy of the judgment, the Bank shall lift the freeze/lien imposed on the Petitioner's account.

vi) 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 officer concerned and retain proof of such service.

vii) The directions of this Court in this judgment will not stand in the way of the Bank effecting freezing/lien based on the requisitions communicated in the future to the Bank with respect to the same account of the Petitioner,