[2026:RJ-JP:8248]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 476/2026 Prashant Kumar Meena S/o Nathu Lal Meena, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Raitha Kalan, Post Chakeri, District Sawai Madhopur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Bank Of India, Through Its Branch Manager, Address - Town Area, Sawai Madhopur.

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Ottappalam, District Palakkad, Kerala.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Jogi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Fahad Hasan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

23/02/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be accepted and allowed and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:-

a. Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the respondent no.1 to immediately unblock/de- freeze the bank account of the petitioner in State Bank of India, bearing bank account number 00000033153256613.

b. Direct the respondent to provide the written reasons for the blocking/freezing of the bank account and any communication/information received from the Cyber Crime Authority, if any.

c. Pass any other appropriate order or relief as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.

d. Cost of the petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never misused the aforesaid bank account for the purpose of illegal transactions and has not committed any cyber crime and has no relation whatsoever to the alleged fraudulent transaction(s).

3. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Agencies and will appear before the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies as and when called upon.

4. Therefore, learned counsel prays that while the disputed amount which has been received in the petitioner's account may be frozen, the amount other than the disputed amount may kindly be allowed to be withdrawn and the petitioner may be allowed to operate and carry out the banking transactions from the said bank account.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent – Bank submits that, as per the information received, the disputed amount credited in the petitioner’s bank account is around Rs.5,000/- and the bank account of the petitioner has been frozen in connection with on-going investigation in financial cyber fraud complaint.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent – Bank further submits that the petitioner may be directed not to discontinue the bank account until the investigation is completed or the criminal case is decided.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent – Bank.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

9. In view of the submissions so made, this Court is of the considered view that merely because a certain amount has been transferred to the petitioner's bank account in an alleged fraudulent transaction, the act of freezing the entire bank account and imposing complete restriction on banking transactions at this stage will seriously prejudice the rights of the petitioner. At the most, the Bank can keep a lien on the amount to the extent it relates to the alleged fraudulent transaction(s) credited in the petitioner’s bank account.

10. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent – Bank to de-freeze the bank account No. 00000033153256613 of the petitioner maintained at SBI Bank, Branch Town Area, Sawai Madhopur and the petitioner may be allowed to operate and carry out banking transactions in the said bank account over and above the disputed amount, in accordance with law. However, the disputed amount i.e., Rs.5,000/- which has been credited in the petitioner’s bank account in connection with the alleged fraudulent transaction(s) shall remain frozen.

11. It