Allowed

Al- Hind Travel Portal LLP v. the Investigation Officer

Kerala HC8 Feb 2024WP(C)/131/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank account frozen on cyber-crime police requisitions. Following an earlier judgment in connected matters, the Court directed the bank to confine the freeze to the amounts specified in the requisition and to seek police confirmation of continued freezing within eight months, leaving other challenges open.

What did the court decide?

Freeze confined to amounts in police requisition; copies of other requisitions to be furnished within two weeks; liberty to challenge reserved.

Al- Hind Travel Portal LLP Vs the Investigation Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

AL- HIND TRAVEL PORTAL LLP
2ND FLOOR, 512679-F, AL HIND TOWER,
JAFARKHAN COLONY ROAD, CALICUT,
KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
REPRESENTATIVE SAJIL RAFI, PIN – 673006.

¶6

BY ADVS.
ASWIN GOPAKUMAR
ANWIN GOPAKUMAR
SARANYA BABU
ADITYA VENUGOPALAN
NIKITHA SUSAN PAULSON
MAHESH CHANDRAN
SHALLET K. SAM

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER,
CYBER CRIME CELL, SECTOR - 06,
GAUTAMBAUDH NAGAR, NOIDA,
INDIA, PIN – 201301.

¶9

2YES BANK, M. G. ROAD, COCHIN
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
PIN – 682035.

¶10

3ICICI BANK LIMITED
KALLAI ROAD, CALICUT, KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
PIN – 673002.

¶11

BY ADVS.
P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY P
PRADEESH CHACKO
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH,

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶14

-2-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The facts involved in this case are covered

¶17

by the judgment of this Court in W.P.
(C).No.12960/2023 and connected matters. Since

¶18

the learned counsel for the parties are ad idem
on this, I deem it apposite to allow this writ
petition in terms of the said judgment.

¶19

–
2.Sri.P.PaulochanAntonylearned

¶20

Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent, however,
submitted that, though the petitioner is only
challenging the requisition received by his

¶21

client from the 1st respondent, they cannot allow
the operations of the account in spite of the
interim order of this Court since there are
other requisitions from various other States,

¶22

numbering to more than 24 or 25. He submitted
that, therefore, even if this Court is inclined

¶23

to allow this writ petition, it may be confined

¶24

to the requisition issued by the 1st

¶25

WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶26

-3-

¶27

respondent.

¶28

3.On hearing Sri.Paulochan Antony as

¶29

afore, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that his client may also be reserved
liberty to approach the 2nd respondent to obtain
all the requisitions, so that they can initiate
action against the same appropriately before
this Court, if they are so advised.

¶30

Consequently, I order this Writ Petition
with the following directions:

¶31

(a) The respondent Bank arrayed in this

¶32

case, is directed to confine the order of freeze
against the accounts of the petitioner, only to

¶33

the extent of the amounts mentioned in the
order/requisition issued to them by the Police
Authorities. This shall be done forthwith, so as

¶34

to enable the petitioner to deal with their
account, and transact therein, beyond that
limit.

¶35

WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶36

concerned are hereby directed to inform the Bank

¶37

as to whether freezing of accounts of the
petitioner in this Writ Petition 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.

¶38

information/intimationfromthePolice

¶39

Authorities, they will adhere to the same and
complete necessary action – either continuing
the freeze for such period as mentioned therein;
or withdrawing it, as the case may be.

¶40

intimation is received by the Bank in terms of
directions (b) above, the petitioner will be at

¶41

full liberty to approach this Court again; for

¶42

which purpose, all their contentions in this

¶43

WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶44

Writ Petition are left open and reserved to
them, to impel in future.

¶45

Needless to say, if the petitioner is to
approach the 2nd respondent for copies of other
requisitions received from Authorities other
than the 1st respondent, it shall be furnished to
them within a period of two weeks on any such
request; and concomitantly, their liberty to
challenge all said requisitions is also left
open through appropriate means.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

akv

¶50

WP(C) NO. 131 OF 2024

¶51

-6-

¶52

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 131/2024

¶53

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶54

EXHIBIT P-1A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED
01.01.2024 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO. 3
BANK
EXHIBIT P-2A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL ALONG WITH
ATTACHMENT RECEIVED FROM RESPONDENT
NO. 2 BANK
EXHIBIT P-3A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED
24.01.2024 RECEIVED FROM RESPONDENT
NO. 2 BANK

Al- Hind Travel Portal LLP v. the Investigation Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Al- Hind Travel Portal LLP v. the Investigation Officer

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

Shaji v Vs Remla Beevi .I

Prasannan Vs State of Kerala

Pius @ Pius Vadakkekunnel Paul Vs Sri. Vishnu Raj

Salin Kumar V.R Vs Remla Beevi . I

A. Sarabeevi Vs Southern Railway

P C George Vs State of Kerala Represented by Secretary to Government