Disposed¶14

M/S Monohar Lal Saraff and Sons Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC24 Feb 2026WPA/7183/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Defreezing of lien-marked bank account of jeweller after cyber-fraud complaint closed as FRT. Keywords: WPA 7183 of 2025; M/s Monohar Lal Saraff and Sons Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.; lien mark removal; Anti Bank Fraud Section, Lalbazar; Cyber Crime Police Station, Siliguri Police Commissionerate; ICICI Bank; phishing/lucrative-offer link; complaint dated 20th June, 2022; no nexus with alleged offence; Rs.90,000/- defrozen within 7 days; writ petition disposed; no costs; Suvra Ghosh, J.; 24.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to defreeze the remaining Rs. 90,000/- by removal of the lien within 7 days from date; writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs. ¶14

M/S Monohar Lal Saraff and Sons Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

jdt. 24.02.2026 jb.

¶3

WPA 7183 of 2025 (M/s Monohar Lal Saraff and Sons Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)

¶4

Mr. Swarup Banerjee Mr. Arindam Chatterjee Mr. Subham Biswas

¶5

…. For the Petitioners Wasim Ahmed Sk. Md. Masud

¶6

…. For the State Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly Ms. Srijani Ghosh Ms. Ankita Jha Ms. Kripa Kami

¶7

…. For the Respondent no. 6

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners sold jewellery to a customer and raised invoice for the same on 8^th June, 2022. The complaint was lodged by the 8^th respondent on 20^th June, 2022 alleging that he received an unknown message from a Bank with lucrative offers and on clicking on the link Rs.90,000/- was debited from his account with ICICI Bank. Pursuant to such complaint the Cyber Crime Police Station, Siliguri Police Commissionerate marked Rs.90,000/- in the petitioner’s account as lien. A preliminary investigation was conducted by the Anti Bank Fraud Section, Lalbazar pursuant to which an amount of another Rs. 90,000/- was marked as lien. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have no nexus with the alleged offence and are suffering for a

¶9

¶10

considerable period of time without any reason whatsoever. They seek defreezing of the account.

¶11

Learned counsel for the 6^th respondent/Bank submits that on receipt of a request from the Siliguri Commissionerate an amount of Rs.90,000/- was marked as lien. On a subsequent request by the Anti Bank Fraud Section, Lalbazar a further amount of Rs.90,000/- was also frozen.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State submits that the matter has culminated in FRT. The Cyber Crime Police Station, Siliguri Police Commissionerate has requested the ICICI Bank to remove the lien mark of Rs.90,000/in the account of the petitioner by letter dated 2^nd April, 2025. The said lien has been removed. However, it is learnt that the lien pursuant to request made by the Anti Bank Fraud Section, Lalbazar is still continuing.

¶13

Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that since the case has ended in FRT and the petitioner does not appear to be having any nexus with the alleged offence, the amount of Rs. 90,000/- marked as lien be defrozen by removal of the lien within 7 days from date.

¶14

With the aforesaid observation and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶15

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

¶17

Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted.

¶18

Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities.

¶19

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)