IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA

th

ON THE 8 OF JANUARY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 48992 of 2025

AM ENTERPRISES THROUGH PROPRIETOR AMAN MANSOORI

AND OTHERS

Versus

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Savya Sachi Saxena - Advocate for the petitioners.

ORDER (supra) is concerned, the same reads as under:-

This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Article

226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs:

"a) This petition may kindly be allowed with cost.

b) Direct the Respondents to remove the illegal and arbitrary freeze/hold imposed on the petitioner’s bank accounts, namely the account of AM Enterprises maintained with Union Bank of India bearing Account No.776801010050160 (IFSC UBIN0577685), the account of Aman Mansuri maintained with HDFC Bank Ltd. bearing Account No.50100711185772 (IFSC HDFC0001057), and the account of Aman Mansuri maintained with State Bank of India bearing Account No.34167761383 (IFSC SBIN0030068), which have been frozen without

any lawful authority or order.

c) Issue such other orders, writ, and direction as this Hon’ble court deems fit

in the interest of justice in favour of petitioner."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the

petitioners is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others passed in W.P.

No.1100 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024.

3. So far as the decision rendered in the case of Malcolm Murayis

"1] This order shall also govern the disposal of W.P. Nos.1100/2024 and 1185/2024 as in both the petitions identical reliefs have been sought by the parties.

2] These petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) This petition may kindly be allowed with cost.

b) To direct the Respondent No. 2 thereby directing Respondents to remove the hold/freeze on the Bank account of petitioners.

c) Issue such other orders, writ, and direction as this Hon’ble court deems fit in the interest of justice in favour of petitioner.”

3] The grievance of the petitioners is that they are engaged in trading of crypto and virtual currency, and having their bank accounts with State Bank of India and ICICI Bank, which have been freezed all of a sudden, only on the intimation sent by the cyber cells of the various police stations, viz., respondent Nos.3 to 9, to freeze the aforesaid account on the allegation that the accounts are involved in some cyber fraud. The amounts of which have also been disclosed, as to how much of the amount is credited in the account of the petitioners, which are linked to cyber crime/fraud.

4] Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have never received any notice from any police station regarding their involvement in any such offence, and even otherwise, they are lawfully carrying out their business of trading, and it appears that some person who was involved in fraud has transacted through the petitioners. Thus, it is submitted that the petitioners may be allowed to operate their bank account, and so far as the amount which is said to be credited on account of the cyber fraud, it is submitted that it may be kept in separate fixed deposits so that the same can be withdrawn as and when the clean chit is given to the petitioner. Counsel has also submitted that none of the investigating agencies have complied with Section 102 of Cr.P.C. and have not informed the concerned Magistrate about such seizure. Thus, it is submitted that the petition be allowed.

5] Counsel for the respondents Banks have submitted that the Banks have not freezed the account of the petitioners on their own but only at the instructions of various cyber cell police stations, and are bound by the instructions issued by such investigating authorities. Thus, it is submitted that the appropriate orders