[2026:RJ-JD:4488]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 36/2026 Junaid Lakhara S/o Fakir Mohammed, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Simlwara Road, Mukam, Post Obri, Dungarpur, Rajasthan -

314401.

----Petitioner Versus Bank Of Baroda, Through Its Nodal Officer, Branch Obri, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan - 314401.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahip Singh For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

23/01/2026

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 an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature, thereby directing the Respondent to immediately defreeze the bank account of the Petitioner bearing bearing no. 11840200000175 with the Bank of Baroda, Branch Obri (IFSC Code BARBOOBRIXX), District Dungarpur, Rajasthan 314401, and to remove all lien/hold entries placed thereupon.

(ii) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature, thereby quashing and setting aside all communications, orders, and directions, if any, whereby the Petitioner's bank account has been frozen without furnishing any prior notice, opportunity of hearing, or disclosure of reasons.

(iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondents to conclude the investigation, if any, within a time- bound manner, and in the meantime to permit the Petitioner to operate his bank account at least partially for meeting essential expenses such as family sustenance, educational fees, medical emergencies, and professional commitments.”

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

117-Ashutosh/-