A petitioner sought directions to unfreeze his savings bank account frozen during KYC compliance because his divorced wife, the joint holder, was not operating it. The court held there was no reason to freeze his account and allowed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~191
DEVENDER KUMAR PATHAK .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shiv Charan Garg and Ms. Jahanvi Garg, Advs.
versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajiv Kapur, SC with Mr. Akshit Kapur and Ms. Riya Sood, Advs. for respondent/SBI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA
O R D E R % 21.10.2024
5 Know Your Customer.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2024 at 12:19:35
DHARMESH SHARMA, J.
OCTOBER 21, 2024/g/sa
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2024 at 12:19:35
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a bank may keep a customer's account frozen on KYC compliance grounds when only the inactive joint holder is affected.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Devender Kumar Pathak
State Bank of India
Dharmesh Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
