SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 363

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Nikita – Appellant
Versus
Kotak Mahindra Bank – Respondent


Advocates:
Sudeel Yadav[P-1],Advocate General[R-1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA

th

ON THE 15 OF JANUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 792 of 2026

NIKITA

Versus

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Sudeel Yadav - Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Pranjali Yajurvedi - Government Advocate for the

respondent/State.

ORDER

This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article

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

"a) Allow the present petition with costs;

b) Direct Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to forthwith remove

the illegal hold/freeze on the petitioner’s bank account;

c) Pass any other order, writ or direction which this Hon’ble Court may

deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."

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

petitioner 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

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

"1] This order shall also govern

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top