[2026:RJ-JD:6904]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2679/2026 Kamlesh Lal Jat S/o Shri Jagdish Chanda Jat, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Jawanpura, Tehsil Antali, Dist. Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Secretariat At Jaipur, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Reserve Bank Of India, Through Its Regional Director, Rambagh Circle, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. HDFC Bank Ltd, Through Its Branch Manager, Mill Road, Bijainagar, Dist. Beawar.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pulkit Pareek For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

06/02/2026

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

“Hence, it is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Writ Petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction, this Hon'le Court may be pleased.

(a) To direct the rspondents to immediately lift the freeze/debit freeze imposed on the Petitioner's savings No. 50100648300475 held with bank account Respondent No. 4 Branch, Bijainagar, Dist. Beawar, Rajasthan.

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

(c) Cost of the litigation may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

(d) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court considers just, fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the Petitioner..”

2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the HDFC Bank Ltd. (Respondent No. 4) 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, then it shall be duty bound to act in accordance with the instant order.

6. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

37-sonia/-