[2026:RJ-JD:3733]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1208/2026 Vikram Singh S/o Shri Ranveer Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Lakhina Bera, Nageshwar Nagar, Balrawa, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Bank Of Baroda, Through Its Branch Manager, Tinwari, District Jodhpur.

2. The Nodal Officer (Compliance And Legal Cell), Bank Of Baroda.

3. The Reserve Bank Of India (Rbi), Through Regional Manager, Reserve Bank Of India, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saddam Hussain For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

21/01/2026

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the respondent bank to immediately defreeze the petitioner’s Account No.40988100009995 with Bank of Baroda, Tinwari, District Jodhpur.

(Annexure-2)

(ii) Quash and set aside any internal or external communication purporting to freeze the said account as illegal, void and without jurisdiction;

(iii) By an appropriate writ, order, or direction, the respondent may kindly be directed to not freeze the bank account of the petitioner in the future without prior notice.

(iv) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

(v) Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while dealing with similar controversy has passed order dated 25.11.2025 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.22577/2025 (Sita Ram vs. Bank of Baroda and Ors.). He prays that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in the same terms as the said writ petition.

3. In view of the submissions made above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Bank to keep the disputed amount (the amount which was transferred illegally in the bank account of the petitioner) frozen and allow the petitioner to make transactions from his bank account from the remaining balance.

4. 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 receipt(s) of the offence, the bank shall send a communication to the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, to indicate the amount to be earmarked for lien, while endorsing a copy of the instant order.

5. Upon receipt of such communication/letter, the concerned Investigating Officer/Police shall be under an obligation to apprise the respondent - Bank about the amount to be kept in lien, within a period of seven days of receiving the communication from the respondent - Bank. The respondent – Bank shall thereafter do the needful as directed herein above. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police within the stipulated period, then it shall de-freeze the bank account of petitioner.

6. Stay petition as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(SUNIL BENIWAL),J

14-AbhishekK/-