Disposed¶21

Antram Jaiswal v. State Bank of India

Chhattisgarh HC19 Feb 2026WPC/770/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank account hold release; State Bank of India lien on customer account released except Rs. 1,000/-; petitioner Antram Jaiswal vs SBI, DCP Cyber Crime PS Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai, National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal; writ petition disposed of by consent-type submissions; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC No. 770 of 2026; Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi; order dated 20-2-2026; pending IAs disposed of; no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of. ¶21

Antram Jaiswal Vs State Bank of India — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

2026:CGHC:9143

¶3

Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.02.23 15:13:35 +0530

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 770 of 2026

¶7

Antram Jaiswal S/o Shiv Kumar Jaiswal Aged About 37 Years Presently Residing At Village Kaitha, P.S. Malkharauda Tehsil Jaijaipur, District- Sakti - 495661

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Bank Of India Through Its Branch Manager, P.O. Jaijaipur, Tehsil Sakti, District- Sakti Chhattisgarh- 495690

¶11

2 - Deputy Commissioner Of Police Cyber Crime Police Station Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai, Maharashtra , 400051

¶12

3 - National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal Through Its Nodal Officer, National Highhway-8 Mahipalpur, New Delhi - 110037

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

For Petitioner	: Mr. Devashish Tiwari, Adv.
For Respondent No. 1	: Mr. P.R. Patankar, Adv.
For Respondents No. 2 and 3	: Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. Govt. Adv.

¶15

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

¶17

Order On Board

¶18

20-2-2026

¶19

At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, on instruction, would submit that the Hold made by the respondent No. 1 in Bank account of the petitioner has been released except for Rs. 1,000/-.

¶20

In view of above contention made by learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, this petition may be disposed of.

¶21

Having considered the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

Pending interlocutory application(s) stands disposed of.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶25

Judge

¶26

pathak

Antram Jaiswal v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antram Jaiswal v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jeevan Das Jogi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahesh Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Fatima Begam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prafull Kumar Manjhi Vs Shri Rituraj Raghuvanshi

Mahaveer Prasad Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh