[2026:RJ-JD:4633]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1668/2026 Himanshu Sharma S/o Shri Chandra Prakash Sharma, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Lachhmangarh Sikar Raj.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Reserve Bank Of India, Through The Director 18Th Floor Central Office Building Shahid Bhagat Singh Road Mumbai-400001

2. The Branch Manager, Bank Of Maharashtra Branch Sikar District Sikar Raj.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Chaudhary Mr. Ram Dev Potalia 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:-

“a) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, this writ petition may kindly be allowed and direct the Respondent No.2 to de-freeze the petitioner's bank account bearing Savings Account No. 60553955432 with Bank of Maharashtra, Branch -Sikar, District - Sikar, (Rajasthan);

b) By an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents may kindly be directed to not freeze the bank account of the petitioner in future without prior notice.

c) Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper, 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

41-Ashutosh/-