[2026:RJ-JD:2524]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22013/2025 Mohan Ram S/o Uma Ram, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Sarano Ki Dhaniya, Sarannagar, Samrau, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Reserve Bank Of India, Through Its Regional Director, Reserve Bank Of India, Jaipur.

3. Icici Bank, Through Its Branch Manager, Branch, Nousar, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

4. Assistant General Manager, Icici Bank, Jodhpur Zone, Jodhpur.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Foja Ram For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

15/01/2026

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

“I. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to declare as illegal, the action of the respondent- Bank in freezing/ holding bearing No.229801001983 in the respondent Bank and entire any subsequent proceedings arising out of the same, and/or;

II. The Hon’ble Court may kindly direct the respondent Bank to forthwith de-freeze the petitioner’s Bank Acount bearing No.229801001983 in the respondent ICIC Bank, Branch Nausar, District Jodhpur (Rajasthan), and/or;

III. Any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, which the Hon’ble Court deems appropriate in the factual matrix of the instant case, may also kindly be passed in favour of 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

99-AbhishekK/-