Disposed

Sibina v. 1. Indian Bank, Chengamanad (Represented through Branch Manager)

Kerala HC21 May 2024WP(C)/12389/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's bank account was frozen on police intimation regarding a disputed amount. Following interim orders restricting the freeze to the disputed amount, the court closed the writ petition applying its earlier directions in Dr.Sajeer confining freezing and regulating continuation.

What did the court decide?

Freeze confined to the disputed amount; account operable beyond that limit; directions in Dr.Sajeer applied.

Sibina Vs 1. Indian Bank, Chengamanad (Represented… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 12389 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SIBINA AGED 38 YEARS KALAMITTAM, SOUTH ADUVASSERY P.O., KUNNUKARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683578

¶8

BY ADVS. IPSITA OJAL MANAS P HAMEED MARIYAMMA A.K. AISHWARYA SHIVAKUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 INDIAN BANK, CHENGAMANAD (REPRESENTED THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER) MAIN ROAD ALUVA CHENGAMANAD ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683578

¶11

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER NALASOPARA POLICE STATION OPT.SAINAGAR, VASAI LINK RD, SHURPARAK NAGAR, LAKSHMIBEN CHEDDA NAGAR, NALA SOPARA, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 401203

¶12

3 OFFICER IN CHARGE CYBER POLICE STATION, CYBER CRIME MUMBAI FIRST FLOOR, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX RD, OPPOSITE ICICI BANK, G BLOCK BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 400051

¶13

BY ADVS. BINOY VASUDEVAN FOR R1 K.V.RAJESWARI FOR R1

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO. 12389 OF 2024 2

¶16

T.R. RAVI, J.

¶17

W.P(C).No.12389 of 2024

¶18

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2024

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner is a holder of an account with the Bank and his account has been frozen on intimation by Police Authorities. The Court had, at the time of admission, issued interim directions to restrict the freezing of the accounts to the amount which had been subject matter of the dispute, as per the intimation received from the Police authorities. The Bank has also taken action to that extent pursuant to the directions issued by this Court. In similar cases, this Court had after issuance of such interlocutory orders, closed the writ petitions with certain directions. Paragraph No.12 of the directions issued in Dr.Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India

¶21

[ 2023 KHC OnLine 661] is extracted hereunder;

¶22

“12. In fact, should the criminal enquiry found otherwise, it will be doubtful if the amounts in question could be even recovered from the petitioners, if they have received it as part of bonafide or

¶23

WP(C) NO. 12389 OF 2024 3

¶24

other valid transactions, unaware of it being proceeds of crime.

¶25

In the conspectus of the above, I order these Writ Petitions with the following directions:

¶26

a. The respondent Banks arrayed in these cases, are directed to confine the order of freeze against the accounts of the respective petitioners, only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the order/requisition issued to them by the Police Authorities. This shall be done forthwith, so as to enable the petitioners to deal with their accounts, and transact therein, beyond that limit.

¶27

b. The respondent – Police Authorities concerned are hereby directed to inform the respective Banks as to whether freezing of accounts of the petitioners in these Writ Petitions will require to be continued even in the afore manner; and if so, for what further time, within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

c. On the Banks receiving the afore information/intimation from the Police Authorities, they will adhere with it and complete necessary action – either continuing the freeze for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be. d. If, however, no information or intimation is received by their Banks in terms of directions (b) above, the petitioners or such among them, will be at full liberty to approach this Court

¶29

WP(C) NO. 12389 OF 2024 4

¶30

again; for which purpose, all their contentions in these Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to them, to impel in future.”

¶31

This writ petition is disposed of with the above said

directions.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

LEK

WP(C) NO. 12389 OF 2024 5

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12389/2024

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BANK PASSBOOK OF THE PETITIONER IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P1. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION MARKING LIEN AMOUNTS ISSUED BY NALASOPARA POLICE STATION IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P2.

Sibina v. 1. Indian Bank, Chengamanad (Represented through Branch Manager)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sibina v. 1. Indian Bank, Chengamanad (Represented through Branch Manager)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreeradh K B Vs the District Collector

Deepika Vijayan Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Nabeesa Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer (R.D.O.)

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Arshad P.M. Vs Union of India

Abdul Basheer Kedumoole Vs Union of India