1. Matter concerns freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, or seizure of bank accounts in cyber financial crime. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 20305
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Anand Sharma, J
MANISH KUMAR GHOSLAYA S/O OMPRAKASH GHOSLAYA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW 16172 / 2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Himanshu
For the Respondents: Munendra Singh Fauzdar, Saumitra Chaturvedi, Shashi Bhushan Gupta
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Himanshu
For the Respondents: Munendra Singh Fauzdar, Saumitra Chaturvedi, Shashi Bhushan Gupta
The Court held that directions issued in a prior judgment concerning the freezing, debit-freezing, and seizure of bank accounts in cyber financial crimes apply mutatis mutandis to subsequent petitions involving the same legal controversy.
Headnote:(A) Banking and Cyber Crime - Freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, holding or seizure of bank accounts - Application of existing judicial directions to similar cases - Where a prior judgment by the same Court has already laid down directions and observations regarding the freezing of bank accounts in cyber financial crimes, subsequent petitions involving the same controversy are to be disposed of by applying those directions mutatis mutandis. (Paras 1-3)
Facts of the case:
A writ petition was filed concerning the freezing or seizure of a bank account in the context of cyber financial crimes.
Findings of Court:
The Court observed that the controversy in the present petition is squarely covered by an earlier judgment of the same Court which addressed the alarming increase in cases involving the freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, and seizure of bank accounts due to cyber financial crimes.
Issues: Whether the directions and observations provided in a preceding judgment concerning the freezing of bank accounts in cyber financial crimes are applicable to the current petition.
Ratio Decidendi: Since the legal controversy is identical to one already resolved by the Court in a similar batch of petitions, the directions and observations issued in that lead case apply mutatis mutandis to the present case.
Result: Writ petition disposed of.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Parties conceded controversy covered by a prior judgment governing bank account freezes in cyber financial crime. (Para 1 )
3. Court noted alarming increase in cases concerning freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, or seizure of bank accounts in cyber financial crime. (Para 2 )
4. Legal principles from the decision in Shree Balaji Enterprises case apply mutatis mutandis to the present petition. (Para 3 )
5. Writ petition disposed of in light of prior judgment with directions and observations applied mutatis mutandis. (Para 3 , 4 )
6. What is the applicable law for disposing of writ petitions concerning frozen bank accounts in cyber financial crime?
Where parties concede the controversy is covered by a prior judgment on the same issue, the court may dispose of the petition applying that judgment mutatis mutandis. (Para 1 , 3 )
7. What is the court's concern regarding cases of freezing bank accounts?
The court noted an alarming increase in cases concerning freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, or seizure of bank accounts in cyber financial crime. (Para 2 )
Order
1. Learned counsel for the parties at the outset fairly conceded that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by judgment dated 20.08.2026 passed by this Court in the case of Shree Balaji Enterprises vs. Reserve Bank of India & Others (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2679/2026 & others connected write petitions) whereby all the writ petitions were disposed of by this Court with certain directions and observations.
2. This Court in the case of Shree Balaji Enterprises (supra), while taking note of alarming increase in the cases concerning freezing, debit-freezing, lien marking, holding or seizure of bank accounts in cyber financial crime and all incidental matters, disposed of batch of petitions with certain directions and observations.
3. Thus, instant writ petition is also disposed of in the light of judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Shree Balaji Enterprises (supra). The observations and directions issued by this Court in the above case shall mutatis mutandis apply to the present writ petition.
4. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
