Disposed¶23

Vaishali Bhatija v. Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre & Anr.

Delhi HC18 Nov 2025W.P.(C)/1991/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank account freeze / defreeze; cybercrime complaint; direction by Union of India / Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (MHA); ICICI Bank account 036901008052, Shalimar Bagh Branch; complainant Sindhe Srikanth; acknowledgment no. 33704200022406; Telangana Cyberabad Sanathnagar, complaint dated 18.04.2024; lien of Rs. 7,000/-; Article 226 mandamus and certiorari; W.P.(C) 1991/2025; Delhi High Court; Justice Jyoti Singh; disposed on 18.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Defreezing of the Petitioner's ICICI Bank account No. 036901008052 (Shalimar Bagh Branch, Delhi) directed, subject to maintaining a lien of Rs. 7,000/-; writ petition disposed of with no further order required. ¶23

Vaishali Bhatija Vs Union of India through Ministry… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1991/2025

¶4

VAISHALI BHATIJA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Varun Varma, Mr. Aakash Choudhary, Mr. Sarthak Upadhyaya and Ms. Susmita Singh, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS INDIAN CYBERCRIME COORDINATION CENTRE & ORS.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoumendu Mukherji, SPC with Ms. Aniruddha Ghosh, Advocate for UoI. Mr. Rachit Bigghe, Advocate for R-2/ICICI Bank. Ms. Devina Sehgal and Mr. Srikanth Varma Mudunuru, Advocates for R-3/State of Telangana.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 18.11.2025

¶13

This writ petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

¶14

“A. Issue a writ of mandamus to the Respondent no.2 and direct the Respondent no.2 to de-freeze the bank account of the Petitioner i.e. bank account bearing account number 036901008052 at ICICI Bank bearing IFSC CODE- ICIC0000369 in Shalimar Bagh Branch, New Delhi.

¶15

B. Issue a writ of certiorari to the Respondent no.1 and set aside the direction given by the Respondent no.1 to the Respondent no.2 for freezing the bank account of the Petitioner in view of the complaint lodged by the Sindhe Srikanth vide acknowledgment no. 33704200022406 with the

¶16

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 19/11/2025 at 14:51:38

¶20

Telangana Cyberabad Sanathnagar on 18.04.2024.”

¶21

Vide order dated 24.09.2025, Respondent No. 3/State of Telangana was directed to file the status report, which has not been filed. However, counsel representing Respondent No. 3, on instructions, submits that State of Telangana has no objection if the account of the Petitioner is defreezed, subject to maintaining a lien of Rs. 7,000/- only.

¶22

Accordingly, it is directed that Respondent No. 2/ICICI Bank, Shalimar Bagh Branch, Delhi shall defreeze the Account of the Petitioner bearing No. 036901008052, subject to maintaining a lien of Rs. 7,000/-.

¶23

In view of above, no further order is required to be passed. Writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶25

NOVEMBER 18, 2025

S.Sharma

Page 2 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 19/11/2025 at 14:51:38

Vaishali Bhatija v. Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaishali Bhatija v. Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Anant Sharma Vs Union of India & Anr.

Force NO.0583941 Satbir Vs Union of India and Ors.

Anil Rai Trust Vs Ifci Limited

Mukesh Yadav Vs Union of India and Anr.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ic 34187K Col Rajnee Kant Verma

Manjeet Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Dr Ankit Dhankar and Ors. Vs the Medical Counselling Committee and Ors.

Sudha Medical College and Hospital Vs Union of India & Ors.

Jnana Bharathi College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Ali Aftab Vs Union of India & Ors.

Aryan Infraheight (P) Limited Vs Signature Global (India). Ltd.

Aryan Infraheight (P) Limited Vs Signature Global Pvt. Ltd.

Sh Sanjay Prasad & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.