Creator Economy Tech Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC6 May 2026W.P.(C)/15183/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debit freeze; bank account lien; cyber complaint; defreezing of current account; Article 226 writ petition; Companies Act 2013; newly framed SOP; commercial death; W.P.(C) 15183/2025; Delhi High Court; Jasmeet Singh, J; Union of India; Rs. 20,02,690/-.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of: account of petitioners to be defreezed subject to Respondent No. 2 bank retaining a lien of Rs. 20,02,690/- on the disputed transactions; petitioners permitted to operate the account; liberty to challenge the lien in accordance with the newly framed SOP. ¶¶36

Creator Economy Tech Private Limited & Anr. Vs Union of… — Company and Corporate | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~37

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 15183/2025 & CM APPL. 69021/2025

¶4

CREATOR ECONOMY TECH PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

¶5

.....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Ms. Sakshi Mehley, Ms. Harshita Kumar, Mr. Sajal Manchanda and Mr. Varun Garg, Advs.

¶7

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nishant Gautam CGSC Ms. Kavya Shukla, Mr. Mr. Vineet Negi. Mr. Vibhav V. Nath and Mr. Diwanshu Thakur, Advs. for R-2.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

06.05.2026

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

¶14

“a) Issue an appropriate Writ or Directions in the form of Mandamus directing the Respondent Nos. 2 to remove the debit freeze on the bank account bearing no. 113605001944 of the Petitioner No. 1;

¶15

b) Issue an appropriate Writ or Directions in the form of Mandamus directing the Respondent Nos. 3 to remove the debit freeze on the bank account bearing no. 113605001944 of the Petitioner No. 1...”

¶16

The case of the petitioners is that the petitioner No.1 is a company

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶19

incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 and petitioner No. 2 is its founder/promoter. The petitioner No.1 has a current bank account with respondent No. 2 bank bearing account no. 113605001944 and the said account of the petitioner has been freezed presumably on a complaint made by cyber police.

¶20

Hence, the present petition.

¶21

Mr. Thakur, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, draws my attention to paragraph No. 6 of the “Short Counter Affidavit on behalf of the respondent No.2”, which states that respondent No. 2 has received request to mark liens on account no. 113605001944 of the petitioner for cyber complaints. The chart reads as under:-

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

¶32

Ms. Mehley, learned counsel for the petitioners, has no objection if the lien continues on the amount covered by these disputes transactions and subject to the same the account is permitted to be operated.

¶33

The freezing of an account is an action entailing serious consequences creating hardships for commercial entities in their smooth functioning and the same might result in commercial death of the petitioners.

¶34

The disputed transactions are to the tune of Rs. 20,02,690/- and subject to respondent No. 2 bank keeping a lien on the said amount, the account of the petitioners shall be defreezed and the petitioners shall be permitted to operate the said account.

¶35

The petitioners are also at liberty to challenge the lien of Rs. 20,02,690/- in accordance with the newly framed SOP.

¶36

The present petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms, along with pending applications, if any.

¶37

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶38

MAY 6, 2026/NG

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 12/05/2026 at 13:12:55

Creator Economy Tech Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Creator Economy Tech Private Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

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

Yashul Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mrs. Movluda Imamalieya Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shri Rikky Gupta & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Maj Goldi Mishra Retd Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shikhil Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shri Dharam Singh Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr.

Union of India Ors. & Ors. Vs Sh Sachin Johari & Ors.

Suman Sharma & Anr. Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Man Mental Health Awareness and Networking Society, through Its Authorised Signatory Vs Rehabilitation Council of India, Ministry of Social Justice a Empowermentnd & Ors.

Dr Venkatesh Ramanand Bhat Vs Union of India & Ors.

R.S. Memorial College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Jay Bajarangbali Private Iti Vs Directorate General of Training

Shreya Das and Ors. Vs National Board of Examination in Medical Science and Ors.

Shiv Shiksha Mahavidyalaya Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.