Dismissed

Untrammelled Solutions Private Limited v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Nov 2023WP/23785/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition under Article 226 and an application under Section 151 CPC, petitioners challenged the freezing of their bank accounts by police direction. The court rejected claims of violation of natural justice and procedural flaws. It dismissed the petition as devoid of merits, directing petitioners to seek defreeze via an application under Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty reserved to file application under Section 451 read with 457 Cr.P.C. for defreeze within two months.

Untrammelled Solutions Private Limited Vs The State… — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 23785 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Untrammelled Solutions Private Limited, Having office at^{2nd Floor,Aditya} Empress Heights, Shaikpet, Jubilee^{Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Director} Singhal Param Raj Sanjay.

¶9

Param Raja Sanjay Singhal, S/o. Sanjay^{Agarwal, Aged about28 years, 4-6-} 90-2-PC Tejaswini Nagar, Villa^{No, 16 Pearl County, Rambagh H Attapur} Hyderabad.

¶10

.....PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^{PrincipalSecretary,Home Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

Station House Officer, Mailardevpalli^{Police StationCyberabad,Ranga Reddy} District.

¶14

3- AXIS Bank Limited, Rep. by^{its Branch [/anager.}

¶15

.....RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndiapraying that tn the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the High Court maybe} pleased to pass an order or writ, more appropriately one^{in the nature of Writ of} Mandamus or any other appropriate^{writ declaring that the action of the} respondent No.2^police in^d irecting/instructing^{the respondentNo 3 bankto} freeze the bank account of^{the petitioner company vide current AccountNumber.} 921020003628324^{and SavingAccount Number.921010055132728in the} respondent No.3^{bank as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of procedureunder} Cr.P.C and against^{the principles of naturaljustice and Violative of Article 14, 1 5,} 16 of constitution of^{lndia and consequentlydirect the respondentsto forthwith} remove the debit^{freeze the said bank accountsof the petitioner companyand}

¶17

permit the petitioner company to operate the said bank accounts without any interference whatsoever in accordance with law.

¶18

|.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶19

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the letter dated 23-03-2023 addressed by the respondent No.2 to respondent No 3 and thereby direct the respondent No.3 to remove the debit freeze the bank account of the petitioner No.1 company vide current Account Number. 921020003628324 and petitioner No.2 saving bank Account Number. 921010055'132728 so as to facilitate the petitioner no.1 company and petitioner No.2 to carry on banking transactions in the said account in an undisturbed manner, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.SHASHTDAR GOUD

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : AGp FOR HOME

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : --

¶23

The Court made the following ORDER

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY IVRIT PETITIONNo.237A5 0F 2023

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Writ Petition is hled to declare the action of respondent No.2 in directing/ instructing respondent No.3_Bank to freeze the bank account of the petitioners uide Current Account No.92 1O20003628324 and Savings Account No.92101O055132728 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the respondents to defreeze the bank accounts of the petitioners and permit them to operate the said bank accounts and pass such other reliefs.

¶27

Petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company represented b_v petitioncr No.2 and doing its business with registration No.36AACCU27 lSPlZO. Respondent No.3 is a banking company within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1940 and it is discharging public statutory functions subject to the control of Rcserve Bank of h'rdia. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner No. l -company is holding a bank account \d,ith respondent No.3-bank uide Current Account No. 921020003628324 and petitioner No.2 is also holding Savings Account No.92 lOIOO55I3272a. The grievance of the petitioners is that erren though they were not arrayed as accused in ant,

¶28

¶29

crime nor their accounts are required for the purpose of investigation in any criminal cases, their accounts were frozen.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that respondent No.2 has no authority to clirect respondent No.3 to freeze the bank accounts of the petitioners, r.r,ho are customers and the said action on the part o[ the respondents amounts to violation of principles of natural j ustice and also the rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Article 14 of Constitution of India. He further submittccl that the respondents are not following the procedure contemplated undcr Section lO2 Cr.p.C.

¶31

Respondent No.2 has hlcd a counter affidavit stating that one Manoj Gupta has lodged a complaint stating that one Pramod Agarwal, who was an ex-emplo-yee, has committed theft of blank signed cheques u,hilc he u,as in his employment by breaching the trust and l-riled up the contents of the cheques and withdrawn an amount of Rs. l0,OO,OOO/- uide cheques bearing Nos.0OO277 and OOO27B, dated 18.03.2023 and got transferred Rs. 1O,OO,0O0/- to his bank account bearing account No.SO 1OO344916345 from the factory,s bank account bearing No.5O200O 14845307 It is further stated that pursuant to the said complaint, hc has registerecl a case in Crime No.20g of 2023, dated 21.04.2023 for the oflences punishable under

¶32

¶33

Sections 4O8 and 379 IpC against the said pramod Agarr.r,al and during the course of investigation, he has obtained bank statements and made requisitions to the Managers of HDFC Bank, Axis Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank on 23.03.2023 and 25.O3.2023, requesting to freeze the account of accused as well as the petitioners herein on account of suspicion and in turn, said bank accounts u,ere frozen as they are required for the purpose of investigation anrl that the respondents_police have follon,ed the procedure contemplated under Section lO2 Cr.p.C. while freezing the bank accounts of the petitioners.

¶34

According to the counter-afhdavit filed by the respondent No.2, the petitioners are having relation with accused and their accounts have been frozen on account of suspicion by following the procedure contemplated under Section lO2 Cr.p.C., therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners. This r.r,ri t petirion is clevoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶35

Accordingly, this Writ petition is clismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file an application under Section 451 read rvith 457 Cr.P.C. before the Court concerned seeking defreeze of their bank accounts and if the petitioners have fulfilled the requirements, concented Court is directed to

¶36

¶37

¶38

examine and dispose of the same, as earl_v as possible, preferably, within a period of two (2) months, from the datc of filing of such application.

¶39

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

¶40

stand closed.

¶41

SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

1 L*9^{C9. tg} 9^? lor^{Home, HighCourt for rhe State of Tetangana} at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶46

2 One CC to Sri K.Shashidar Goud, Advocate tOpUCl 3 Two CD Copies

€frk

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 11112023

ORDER

WP.No.23785 ot 2023

51AT€ oF
o
)u tll\ 'l\1\ j:
tt
oo I
r.C
,} t.)E!'r

¶55

DISMISSING THE W.P

¶56

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶57

C
11
1..1' ,.(
,

Untrammelled Solutions Private Limited v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Untrammelled Solutions Private Limited v. The State of Telangana

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

Nandigama Prabhu Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Komirelli Lalitha Vs The State of Telangana

Lalas Cafe and Bistro Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Ayesha Banu Vs The state of Telangana

Tallapak Divya Mounika, Vs The State of Telangana

Chougoni Anjali @ Chougoni Anjamma Vs The State of Telangana