[2026:RJ-JD:4806]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1612/2026

1. Muskan Solanki D/o Laxman Ram Solanki, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Purani Bhakhari Bas, Jodhpur (Raj.).

2. Dixit Kumar S/o Shri Dilip Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Shiv Sakti Nagar, Baori Kalan, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police, Police Directorate, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

3. Station House Officer, Police Station Udaipur.

4. Hdfc Branch Nai Sadak, Hdfc Bank Ltd. 12 And 37, Stadium Shopping Centre Opposite Umaid Stadium, Jodhpur (Jodhpur Through Its Branch Manager).

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Khushboo Palasiya For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

27/01/2026

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

“i. (By the issuance of any appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned action of the respondent bank and the respondent investigation agency and unconstitutional, Consequently, the same may be quashed ,set aside and rendered null and void in the interest of justice.

ii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent may kindly be directed to de-

freeze the Bank account effectively.

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

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

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 their bank account number

50100497626220 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

39-AbhishekK/-