[2026:RJ-JD:4628]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1671/2026 Satendra Singh Gurjar S/o Nihal Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Dubbi, Biwai District Dousa.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs Having Its Office At North Block Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs Having Its Office At Secretariat, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur Raj.

3. Reserve Bank Of India, Through Its Regional Director, Having Its Office At Rambagh Circle, Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj.

4. Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, Through Its Branch Manager, Having Its Office Vishyadhar Nagar, District Jaipur.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ansarul Hak Mansuri 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) To direct the respondents to immediately lift the freeze/debit freeze imposed on the petitioner's saving bank account No. 1668019887210172 held with respondent No.4 Branch - Vidhyadhar Nagar, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

(ii) To award the Petitioner adequate compensation for the financial losses suffered due to the arbitrary and unlawful freezing of his accounts.”

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

19-Ashutosh/-