Sunil Kumar Nahak v. Union of India

Orissa HC23 Sept 2024WP(C)/21459/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

bank account defreezing writ petition; unauthorized credit Rs.500; Cyber Crime Portal Ministry of Home Affairs account freeze; IDBI Bank Badabazar Branch Berhampur account No.1843104000047311; retain Rs.1000 balance permit rest; Sunil Kumar Nahak versus Union of India and Ors.; P.K. Parhi DSGI; Sanjibani Mishra advocate; Orissa High Court Cuttack; Dr. S.K. Panigrahi Judge; disposed 23.09.2024.

What did the court decide?

Partial defreezing: Branch Manager, IDBI Bank (O.P. No.4) to hold back Rs.1000/- as balance till conclusion of the case and allow the Petitioner banking transactions for the remainder of the amount. ¶¶21

Sunil Kumar Nahak Vs Union of India — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.21459 of 2024

¶2

Sunil Kumar Nahak …. Petitioner(s) Miss Sanjibani Mishra, Adv.

¶3

-versus-

¶4

Union of India & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along with Mr. U.R. Jena, CGC

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

Order No.

ORDER 23.09.2024

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶11

2 . In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has sought for a direction from this Court to the Cyber Crime Portal of Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi/Opposite Party No.3 for defreezing his savings bank account bearing No.1843104000047311 maintained with the IDBI Bank, Badabazar Branch, Berhampur.

¶12

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that due to unauthorized credit of a sum of Rs.500/- in the above noted Bank account of the Petitioner, the Opposite Party No.3 has freezed the said account. She further submits that the Petitioner had no idea about the said transaction. He only knew the said fact after freezing of his bank account.

¶13

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that

¶14

Signature Not Verified 4.

¶15

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 25-Sep-2024 17:38:02

¶16

since the Petitioner is a businessman, he depends on the above noted Bank account for his day-to-day business

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

Ayaskanta

¶19

transaction. She, accordingly, prays for defreezing the above noted Savings Bank account of the Petitioner.

¶20

5. Considering the submission made on behalf of the Petitioner and looking to the factual scenario of the case, this Court directs the Branch Manager, IDBI Bank/Opposite Party No.4 to maintain a sum of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as balance till conclusion of the case and permit the Petitioner to make necessary banking transaction for the rest of the amount from the said account.

¶21

6. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶22

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 25-Sep-2024 17:38:02

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Sunil Kumar Nahak v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Nahak v. Union of India

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

Pratima Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Arati Sarakar Vs Tahasildar Mahakalapara

Kartik Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Barada Prasana Das Vs Union of India

Narendra Das Vs State of Orissa

Deba Korkora Vs State of Odisha