Nazma Khatun Vs the State Bank of India and Anr.

CONSTITUTED UNDER THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT ,1955, HAVING ITS CORPORATE CENTRE, 8TH FLOOR, STATE BANK BHAWAN, M.C. ROAD, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI, MAHARSTHRA, PIN-400021, INDIA. HAVING ONE OF ITS HEAD OFFICE , NORTH EASTERN CIRCLE, G.S ROAD, NEAR ASSAM SACHIVALAYA, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, ASSAM, HEREIN REP. BY ITS DGM AND CIRCLE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

¶10

2:THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA HATSINGIMARI BRANCH

¶11

P.O

¶12

P.S AND DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSA

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N ALAM R K, MS. M MALIK,MR. A RAHMAN

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : MR K DAS (r-1,2), MR. S Ali (r-1,2)

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶17

ORDER

¶18

09.03.2026

¶19

Heard Shri A. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank.

¶20

2. Considering the facts and circumstances involved and also, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶21

3. As per the facts projected, the petitioner has a business of dry fruits and is having a licence issued by the competent authority to run the same. The petitioner has a savings bank account, being A/C No. 31155753616 in the Hatsingimari Branch of the respondent-State Bank of India. It is contended that the transactions are done in the aforesaid account.

¶22

4. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to an action of the respondent Bank to put on hold an amount of Rs. 15 lakhs in the aforesaid savings account of the petitioner. It is submitted that no reasons have been disclosed to her and the petitioner has been deprived of her legitimate right to operate her bank account.

¶23

5. Shri Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the prayer made in this petition has submitted that a direction be issued to allow the petitioner to operate her account.

¶24

6. Per contra, Shri Das, learned counsel for the respondent Bank, by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on 13.12.2023, has submitted that certain transaction was found to be doubtful as the source was from foreign contribution which is in

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

contravention of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA). There was also a complaint lodged by one Christian Foundation Charitable Trust in this regard. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to a communication dated 06.10.2023 whereby the petitioner was advised to visit the Branch and submit the details of the transaction to remove any doubt which had arisen on the aforesaid transaction. He has submitted that in spite of the same, no steps have been taken by the petitioner to explain the position and remove the doubt.

¶27

7. Shri Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a direction may be given to the petitioner to visit the Branch and make the clarification whereafter the action of the Bank to freeze the account may be removed.

¶28

8. The reason for putting on hold the transaction of the aforesaid account of the petitioner has come to light after filing of the affidavit-in-opposition by the respondent SBI Bank. It is clearly averred that there was a deposit of a major amount of Rs.15 lakhs which may involve contravention of the FC(R)A and in that regard, there was also a complaint by a charitable trust. Whether an action of freezing can be done only on the basis of a complaint of an individual can be a matter of dispute, what appears from the communication dated 06.10.2023 is that the petitioner was advised to visit the Branch to make the clarification. Such a recourse by the Bank cannot be said to be unreasonable when the amount involved is major and there is also a doubt which has arisen.

¶29

9. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that instead of keeping this matter pending any further, the petitioner is directed to visit the Branch with necessary clarification and explanation towards the deposit of the amount of Rs. 15 lakhs in her account. On furnishing of such clarification/explanation along with the relevant documents, the respondent Bank will take appropriate decision and

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

communicate the same to the petitioner. It is, however, made clear that if satisfactory reasons and explanations are given, the decision to keep on hold the account of the petitioner be revoked and the petitioner be allowed to operate the aforesaid savings bank account without any hurdles.

¶32

10. Shri Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, has submitted that within a period of 10 days, the petitioner will approach the Branch.

¶33

11. Accordingly, it is observed that on such approach, the directions made above shall be meticulously followed.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Nazma Khatun v. the State Bank of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazma Khatun v. the State Bank of India and 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

Showkat Ahmad and 158 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Gaurab Dey Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Samsul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Bismita Malakar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Krishna Konwar @ Krishna Melang Vs the Election Commission of India and 4 Ors.

Islam Uddin and 28 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.