Disposed¶24

Bulu Parida v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Sept 2024WP(C)/19094/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank account freeze/defreeze direction by writ; cyber/online-sale F.I.R. over OLX advertisement for Royal Enfield G/2 spare parts; State Bank of India, Jhanjirimangala/Jhanjir Mangala Branch, Raja Bagicha, Cuttack; Account No.35654431604; Inspector-in-Charge, City C Division Police Station, Jamnagar; W.P.(C) No. 19094 of 2024; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi; order dated 12.09.2024.

What did the court decide?

Defreezing of the Petitioner's bank Account No.35654431604 by Opposite Party No.5/Bank while holding Rs.1,000/-, with the Petitioner permitted to transact the account frequently; Writ Petition disposed of. ¶24

Bulu Parida Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 19094 of 2024

¶3

Bulu Parida

¶4

..…... Petitioner(s)

¶5

Mr. A.K. Das, Adv.

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶8

………. Opposite Parties Mr. P.V. Balakrishna , Adv. for O.P.5

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

12.09.2024

Order No.

This matter is taken up through a hybrid arrangement.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction

¶18

from this Court to the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 5 to release/defreeze the account of the Petitioner bearing bank Account No.35654431604 of the State Bank of India, Jhanjirimangala Branch, Raja Bagicha, Cuttack.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Opposite Party No.6 had made an advertisement for selling of G/2 spare parts of Royal Enfield Motorcycle through Online platform i.e. Signature Not Verified OLX website. The Opposite Party No.7 had purchased the said Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication parts on payment of Rs.21,000/- to the Opposite Party No.6, Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 17-Sep-2024 18:37:05

¶20

which was duly received by him.

¶21

¶22

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that after receiving the above noted parts, the Opposite Party No.7 raised the dispute with Opposite Party No.6 that he has not received the same model parts as per the advertisement made in OLX website by the Opposite Party No.6. Accordingly, he lodged an F.I.R. before the Opposite Party No.4/Inspector-in-Charge, City C Division Police Station, Jamnagar. He further submits that without any investigation the Opposite Party No.4 directed the Opposite Party No.5/Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Jhanjir Mangala Branch to freeze the above noted bank account of the Petitioner, with which only Rs.1000/- had been credited from the account of the Opposite Party No.6.

¶23

In such view of the matter, the Opposite Party No.5/Bank is directed to defreeze the aforesaid account of the Petitioner by holding Rs.1,000/- and allowed the Petitioner to transact his account frequently.

¶24

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶25

( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶26

Signature Not Verified Judge

¶27

Murmu Digitally SignedSigned by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 17-Sep-2024 18:37:05

Bulu Parida v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bulu Parida v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bichitrananda Lenka Vs Union of India

Akshya K.Pradhan Vs Cesu and Anr.

Braja Kishore Rout Vs Central Bank of India,Jajpur

Niranjan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Santosh Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Odisha

Dibakar Behera Vs State of Odisha