Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.SARAVANAN, J
T.R.Shakila – Appellant
Versus
The Manager, Indian Bank – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court addresses petitioner's inability to access their bank account. (Para 1 , 6) |
| 2. court refers to established precedents on account freezing procedures. (Para 2) |
| 3. court emphasizes the importance of quantifying amounts in freeze orders. (Para 4 , 7) |
| 4. petitioner claims harm due to unjustified account freeze. (Para 5) |
| 5. court rules to permit operation of the account under specified conditions. (Para 8) |
ORDER
This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. As a matter of fact, the issue is now covered by a decision of this Court rendered in W.P.No.25631 of 2024 in the case of Mohammed Saifullah Vs. Reserve bank of India and others, dated 10.09.2024, wherein, this Court has referred to Circular Memorandum issued by the Commissioner of Police, Chennai dated 24.06.2021 bearing C.No.131/COP,GCP/Camp/2021, the content of which is extracted below:
3. This Court, in the above case, has observed as under:
“6. Unfortunately, in most of the cases the guidelines issued in this Circular not observed. Later when an identical issue came up for consideration bef
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
