THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.20107 of 2025

O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the writ petition and the nature of lis involved, this Court is of the view that notice to respondent Nos.5 to 11 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the 4th respondent-authority had freezed the petitioners’ bank accounts maintained with unofficial respondents herein without following due process of law as well as Section 102(3) of Cr.P.C., which action of the respondents-authorities it is contended as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India, with a consequential direction to defreeze the petitioners’ bank accounts.

4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondents-authorities while denying the writ averments would submit that based on the complaint dt.26.11.2024, made by one L.Venkateshwarlu, alleging that one Syed Fazal Ali, introducing himself as Managing Director of GSR Construction Company, had offered to sell a plot of land to the complainant and received an amount of Rs.60 lakhs, but did not register the plot; and that based on the said complaint, the 4th respondent-authority had registered a case vide Crime No.1782/2024.

5. Learned Government Pleader further submits that during the course of investigation into the aforesaid crime, it revealed that the petitioners herein, who are father, sister and brother of accused namely Syed Fazal Ali, have shared the aforesaid amount among themselves, and thus, the authorities have issued notice to the unofficial respondents-banks to debit freeze the accounts of the petitioners, pending further investigation into the aforesaid crime.

6. Learned Government Pleader would further submit that the respondents-authorities on freezing the accounts of the petitioners maintained with the unofficial respondents-banks, have informed the same to the jurisdictional Magistrate and if the petitioners intend to seek de-freezement of their accounts, have to approach the jurisdictional Court and for the said reason, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable.

7. I have taken note of the respective submissions made.

8. Though the petitioners by the present Writ Petition have claimed their accounts being freezed by the respondents- authorities without following the due procedure as prescribed under Section 102(3) of Cr.P.C./106(3) of BNSS, since, it is now stated by the learned Government Pleader for Home before this Court that the authorities having registered a case vide Crime No.1782/2024 against one Syed Fazal Ali, and the in course of investigation, having found the misappropriated amount being shared by the accused along with the petitioners herein and in order to secure the presence of the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid crime, so also to secure the amount, which is alleged to be misappropriated, the authorities having freezed the petitioners’ bank accounts maintained with the unofficial respondents herein, this Court is of the view that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents- authorities in freezing their bank accounts have to avail the remedy provided under Section 497 of BNSS by approaching the Court having jurisdiction, as held by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP.No.9689/2020, dt.05.07.2021.

9. Granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional Court by filing an application under Section 497 of BNSS, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

10. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J

16^th July, 2025.

gra