2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 15859
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
SANDEEP TANEJA
ASHOK KHADOTYA S/O PHOOL CHAND YADAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 18202 / 2025
##PAGE1##
[2025:RJ-JP:51220]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18202/2025
Ashok Khadotya S/o Phool Chand Yadav, Aged About 32 Years,
Khadotya Ka Mohalla, Kanpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303806.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur - 302005.
2. State Bank Of India, Through Its Branch Manager,
Address Balaji Market, Samode, Ajeetgarh Road, Vpo
Samode, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303806.
3. Inspector Of Police, Police Station Medipally, Rachakonda,
Telangana. Pin Code- 500098.
4. Inspector Of Police, Cyber Crime Police, Cyberabad,
Telangana. Pin Code- 500032.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Devra for
Mr. Adarsh Singhal
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anita Aggarwal with
Mr. Laxmi Kant
Ms. Devakriti Vashishtha with
Ms. Bhagyashree Jain for
Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Order
18/12/2025
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with
the following prayers:-
“(i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction
commanding the Respondent Bank to immediately
unfreeze the current account of the petitioner
bearing Account No. 61206681265, held with
State Bank of India.
(ii) Direct the Respondent Bank to provide written
reasons for the freezing of the account and any
communication received from Cyber Crime
authorities, if any.
(iii) Declare that the action of the Respondent
Bank is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles
14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution of
India.
(iv) Award costs of this petition in favour of the
Petitioner.
(Uploaded on 20/12/2025 at 11:34:46 AM)
(Downloaded on 18/01/2026 at 01:49:27 AM)
##PAGE2##[2025:RJ-JP:51220] (2 of 3) [CW-18202/2025]
(v) Pass such further or other orders as may be
deemed just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
(vi) Any other appropriate order or direction which
is deemed just and proper in the facts and
circumstance by this Hon'ble Court may also be
passed in favour of the petitioner's committee.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has not been involved in any cyber fraud activity, and that his
entire account has been freezed by the Bank authorities on
account of receiving an amount allegedly being part of cyber fraud
transactions. He further submits that the petitioner is ready and
willing to co-operate with the investigation and the bank
authorities as and when required.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent - Bank submits that
account of the petitioner has been freezed in compliance with the
direction of Investigating Officer regarding complaints of cyber
crime committed and alleged disputed amount deposited in the
bank account of the petitioner.
4. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the
instant writ petition is disposed of by issuing direction to the
respondent - Bank to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner
bearing No. 61206681265 with State Bank of India, Balaji Market,
Samode, Ajeetgarh Road, VPO Samode, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
However, the respondents are directed to freeze the disputed
amount only, which is alleged to have been credited in the
aforesaid account of the petitioner in connection with the
fraudulent transactions. The petitioner shall be allowed to operate
the aforesaid bank account and make transactions for the balance
amount.
(Uploaded on 20/12/2025 at 11:34:46 AM)
(Downloaded on 18/01/2026 at 01:49:27 AM)
##PAGE3##[2025:RJ-JP:51220] (3 of 3) [CW-18202/2025]
5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent – Bank
has not received the information regarding the exact figure of the
disputed amount, which the Investigating Officer / Police alleges
to be genesis of the offence, the Bank shall send a communication
to the concerned Investigating Officer / Police, to indicate the
amount to be earmarked for lien.
6. Upon receipt of such communication / letter, the concerned
Investigating Officer / Police shall be under an obligation