Disposed¶18

Rupesh Kumar Yadav v. Au Small Finance Bank

Delhi HC21 Jul 2026W.P.(C)/9634/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rupesh Kumar Yadav v. AU Small Finance Bank, W.P.(C) 9634/2026, High Court of Delhi, Jasmeet Singh, J., order dated 21.07.2026: freeze of petitioner's entire bank account for a disputed amount of Rs. 100/- held disproportionate, arbitrary and without application of mind; petitioner permitted to operate account No. 2401245564153212 subject to lien of Rs. 100/-; petition disposed of as not pressed. Keywords: bank account freeze, blanket freeze, proportionality, arbitrary action, lien, fundamental rights, daily wage labourer.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to operate his savings bank account No. 2401245564153212, subject to the respondent bank marking a lien on Rs. 100/-; petition disposed of as not pressed in view of the order. ¶18

Rupesh Kumar Yadav Vs Au Small Finance Bank — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~88

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 9634/2026 RUPESH KUMAR YADAV ....Petitioner Through: Mr. Deepak Singh Antil, Ms. Palak Sirohi, Advs. versus AU SMALL FINANCE BANK .....Respondent Through: Mr. Devashish Marwah, Mr. Gurdeep Singh and Ms. K. Natasha, Advs.

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 21.07.2026

¶5

CM APPL. 44938/2026

¶6

Exemptions granted, subject to all just exceptions.

¶7

The application is disposed of.

¶8

W.P.(C) 9634/2026

¶9

Mr. Marwah, learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions from the respondent bank states that the disputed amount for placing the bank account of the petitioner on freeze is Rs. 100/-.

¶10

Since the disputed amount is only Rs. 100/-, I am of the view that the entire account of the petitioner cannot be freezed.

¶11

Freezing of an account is an action entailing serious consequences creating hardships for the petitioner herein as the same happens to be a daily wage labour utilizing his income for meeting daily household expenses. An action of blanket freeze will result in extreme hardships and inconvenience to the petitioner hampering livelihood of his family. The respondent bank

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 30/07/2026 at 15:36:36

¶14

cannot be permitted to take such harsh measures without any application of mind.

¶15

For the said reasons, the impugned action of account freezing in the present case is disproportionate and an arbitrary exercise of power thereby striking a blow at the fundamental rights of the petitioner. The impugned action is without due application of mind as an indiscriminate blanket freeze has been imposed on the account of the petitioner for an alleged suspicious entry of a meagre amount.

¶16

Subject to the respondent bank marking a lien on Rs. 100/-, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate his savings bank account No. 2401245564153212.

¶17

In view of the Order passed, Mr. Antil, learned counsel for the petitioner, does not press the present petition.

¶18

With these directions, the petition stands disposed of.

¶19

The document handed over in Court today is taken on record.

¶20

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶21

JULY 21, 2026/AS

¶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 30/07/2026 at 15:36:36

Rupesh Kumar Yadav v. Au Small Finance Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Kumar Yadav v. Au Small Finance Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Prakash Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Namita Gupta Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ritu Dhingra Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

M/S B.M. Water Meters Vs Delhi Jal Board & Anr.

Sadhu Vaswani International School for Girls Vs Directorate of Education

Mahinder Narang & Anr. Vs Gurpreet Kaur Nanda & Ors.

Kamal Prakash Yadav Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Kunwar Pal Vs Servel India Pvt. Ltd.

Kaila Devi College of Education & Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Aadinath Academy Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Nishit Badola Vs Union of India through Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Anr.

Bharat Pustak Bhandar Vs Sammaan Capital & Anr.

Siddhivinayak Shikshan Prasark Mandals R.K. B.Ed. College Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Ram Ji College of Pharmacy Vs Pharmacy Council of India