Held that freezing of petitioner's account was unwarranted as police sought only a lien over Rs.20,900. Directed bank to defreeze account. Connected petitions closed.
Directed second respondent to defreeze the account of the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
and WMP Nos.26516, 26517 & 26518 of 2024
M/s.Victory Aluminium Company, Rep. by its Partner, Mr.Mohamed Ismail S.M. No.55, Devaraja Mudali Street, Parktown, Chennai 600 003. ...Petitioner
Vs.
Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus and call for the records pertaining to the impugned notice dated 25.07.2024 bearing
1/6
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
O.W.No.3453/Sr.PI/SRCPS/2024 issued by the first respondent and quash the same and to further direct the second respondent to lift the mark of debit freeze placed on the bank account of the petitioner bearing Account No.190205001080.
For Petitioner : Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan
For Respondents : No appearance
O R D E R
Pursuant to the communication from the first respondent, the second respondent has freezed the account of the petitioner. The
communication of the first respondent reads as below:
2/6
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
2 . Apart from this, certain other information was also sought by
the first respondent from the second respondent. In view of the said communication dated 25.07.2024, the account of the petitioner has been freezed. The statement of account produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner indicates that, after debiting an amount of Rs.20,900/which is mentioned in the communication, as on 09.08.2024 in the petitioner’s account a sum of Rs.11,44,277/- was lying as balance.
3. The second respondent bank had debit freezed the account which has disentitled the petitioner to operate to withdraw money. The perusal of the letter of the first respondent which is partly extracted above, indicates that the first respondent I.O. had requested the Bank to create the lien to the tune of Rs.20,900/- based on the complaint given by one Anilkumar Sharma. Subsequently, the Bank has also debited that amount from the account of the petitioner.
4. The notice sent to the first respondent has evoked no response. In the said circumstances, a cumulative reading of the letter of the first
3/6
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
respondent and the subsequent act of the second respondent debiting Rs.20,900/- which was sought to create a lien by the first respondent, this
Court is of the view that the freezing of account by the second respondent is unwarranted while the first respondent himself has sought only to create the lien over Rs.20,900/- and that has also been subsequently debited as per the Court order, probably the Defacto Complainant would have filed an application before the concerned Court
to get back that money, he is alleged to have lost in the Cybercrime.
5. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed, the second respondent is directed to defreeze the account of the petitioner herein. The object of the first respondent has been substantially complied with, accordingly the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
01.10.2024
jv
Internet: Yes/No Index: Yes/No speaking order/ Non Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No
4/6
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
To
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
Dr.G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
jv
W.P.No.24272 of 2024
01.10.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the freezing of the petitioner's bank account by the second respondent was unwarranted given that the first respondent sought only a lien over Rs.20,900.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.Victory Aluminium Company
The Senior Inspector of Police, South Region Cyber Police Station
The Branch Manager, ICICI Babk Ltd.
G.Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
