Allowed

Dr.S.Hyderi v. The Inspector of POlice

Madras HC20 Sept 2023WP/6679/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, a victim claimed money stolen via fraud was transferred to his bank by an accused. The court directed the receiving bank to reverse the transaction based on a notice from the investigating police officer.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to revert the sum of Rs.1,99,987.50 to the petitioner's account within one week by acting on the police notice.

Dr.S.Hyderi Vs The Inspector of POlice — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.No.6679 of 2023

¶7

Dr.S.Hyderi S/o.Saifuddin

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

1.The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime North Zone, Tondiarpet Chennai.

¶11

2.The Nodal Officer/Manager Axis Bank, TRISHUL Opp.Samartheswar Temple New Law Garden, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad.

¶12

3.The Branch Manager Axis bank Vasanthkunj Branch Upper Ground Sector C-Pocket 9 Pawa Presidental Business Park New Delhi-110070.

¶13

3.The Branch Manager Kotak Mahindra Bank Parry's Corner Branch Chennai.

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

¶17

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to revert back the cheated amount of Rs.1,99,990/- from the accused A/c No.922010007231261 Axis Bank, Vasanthkunj Branch, New Delhi/3^rd respondent herein to the petitioner's A/C No.04640020000097, IFSC Code KKBK0000464, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Parry's Corner Branch, Chennai on the basis of the notice sent by 1^st respondent/Inspector of Police dated on 19.10.2022 which the petitioner is legally entitled for.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Emalias

¶19

For respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R1

¶20

No Appearance for R2, R3

¶21

Mr.A.Ameen for R4

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the 3 rd respondent

¶24

Bank to remit the sum of Rs.1,99,990/- to the account of the petitioner maintained in the 4 th respondent Bank based on the notice that was sent by the 1 st respondent on 19.10.2022.

¶25

2.Heard Mr.C.Emalias, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶26

Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R1 and

¶27

Mr.A.Ameen, learned counsel for R4. T he 2^nd and 3^rd respondents have https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

¶29

been served with notice and their names have also been printed in the cause list. However, there is no representation for the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents either in person or through counsel.

¶30

3.The case of the petitioner is that he is having a Bank account in the 4th respondent bank. The petitioner received SMS to pay electricity bill and believing the same, the petitioner gave certain details and as a result, a sum of Rs.1,99,990/- was debited from the bank account of the petitioner maintained in the 4 th respondent bank and it was credited in the 3rd respondent bank. Since the petitioner was cheated, he gave a complaint and based on the same, an FIR was registered in Crime No.250 of 2022 on 21.7.2022. The investigation was transferred to the file of the 1 st respondent and it was investigated for the offence u/s.420 IPC and Section 66A of the IT Act.

¶31

4.The 1 st respondent during the course of investigation, had issued a notice dated 19.10.2022 to the 2 nd respondent informing about the incident and had directed the 2 nd respondent to furnish the details of the beneficiary to proceed further in the case. The 1 st respondent had also directed the 2nd respondent to revert the amount that was taken away from the bank account of the petitioner maintained in the 4 th respondent bank. Since the 2 nd and 3 rd respondents did not act upon the notice issued by the 1 st respondent, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

¶33

5.In the considered view of this Court, the amount of the petitioner was hacked by deception and it remains with the 3 rd respondent bank. When the 1 st respondent issues a notice directing the nodal officer of Axis Bank to revert the amount back to the account of the petitioner, the bank has to comply with the same. The Axis Bank cannot remain a silent spectator, when its attention has been drawn to the fact that the petitioner has been cheated and the amount from his bank account has been transferred to the Axis Bank.

¶34

6.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) further brought to the notice of this Court that to ensure that the amount is kept intact in the Axis Bank, the account maintained in the 3 rd respondent bank was freezed by the 1st respondent and thereby, a total sum of Rs.5,41,779/- which remains in the 3rd respondent bank has been freezed.

¶35

7.In the light of the above discussion and submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), there shall be a direction to the 3 rd respondent to revert the sum of Rs.1,99,987.50 to the account of the petitioner maintained at Kotak Mahindra Bank, Parry's Corner Branch, by acting upon the notice issued by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime, North Zone, Chennai dated 19.10.2022. This process shall be completed by the 2 nd and 3 rd respondents, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

¶38

8.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.

¶39

20 .09.2023

¶40

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No kp

¶41

¶42

1.The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime North Zone, Tondiarpet Chennai.

¶43

2.The Nodal Officer/Manager Axis Bank, TRISHUL Opp.Samartheswar Temple New Law Garden, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad.

¶44

3.The Branch Manager Axis Bank Vasanthkunj Branch Upper Ground Sector C-Pocket 9 Pawa Presidental Business Park New Delhi-110070.

¶45

3.The Branch Manager Kotak Mahindra Bank Parry's Corner Branch Chennai.

¶46

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

¶49

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. kp

¶50

W.P.No.6679 of 2023

¶51

20.09.2023

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Dr.S.Hyderi v. The Inspector of POlice

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.S.Hyderi v. The Inspector of POlice

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

I.Thilagaraj Christopher Vs Dr.P.Balachandar and another

Nijam Vs Inspector of Police

Sathish Kumar Vs a.Sekar (Died) K. Bharathi

The Chief Executive Officer Vs The Director General of Police

K.Elumalai Vs the State Rep by Its

Palanisami Vs The Superintendent of Police