Gujarat High Court
Naikar Narendra Surendrabhai vs Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14955 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
================================================================
NAIKAR NARENDRA SURENDRABHAI & ANR.
Versus
INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SULAIMAN I LABBAI(11342) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MS KIRAN R PATEL(13774) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
HIRENKUMAR R VARMA(8738) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR AMAR N BHATT(160) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR KAMLESH P VAIDANKAR(10135) for the Respondent(s) No. 6
NILU K VAIDANKAR(8382) for the Respondent(s) No. 6
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 29/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for the
following reliefs:-
"8(a) YOUR LORDSHIPS pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or
appropriate writ, direction or order to the respondent no.2 to confine the
order of freeze against the bank account of the petitioners, only to the
extent of the amounts mentioned in the order/requisition issued to them
by the Police Authorities and to enable the petitioners to deal with their
accounts, and transact therein, beyond that limit.
(b) YOUR LORDSHIPS pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
appropriate writ, direction or order "to Respondent no.3 & 4 to Set-up
fast-track Centralized Mechanism where a layman can approach and
get his Bank Account Un-Freeze in case his account was Freezed in lieu
of bona-fide transactions" within a Stipulated Time.
(c) YOUR LORDSHIPS pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or
appropriate writ, direction or order to respondents to Directing to Pay a
sum of Amount as this Hon'ble Court may Deem fit to Compensate
towards the losses incurred & Mental Hardships faced by the
Petitioners in the Interest of Justice.
Interim Relief:
(d) YOUR LORDSHIPS pleased to Direct the respondents to the
respondent no.2 to confine the order of freeze against the bank account
no.71840100010509, Bank of Baroda, Anand-Bag Branch at
Ahmedabad, only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the
order/requisition issued to them by the Police Authorities i.e. Rs. 190/-
and to enable the petitioners to deal with their accounts, and transact
therein, beyond that limit.
(e) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY KINDLY be pleased to grant such further
and other order or relief as deemed fit and proper in the interest of
justice;"
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioners' bank
account came to be debit freezed by the respondent No.2 Bank
under the instructions dated 01.02.2024 received by it from the
respondent No.1 under Sections 91 and 102 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. That the petitioners came to be informed
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
that there was a disputed/suspicious transaction of Rs.3,800/-
on 14.08.2023 in the petitioners savings account. Aggrieved, the
petitioners sent email to unfreeze the account except for the
disputed amount of transaction. That receiving no response and
suffering from freezing of the funds, the petitioners thereafter
received a communication dated 04.09.2024 in respect of
bifurcation of the lien amount in the petitioners' bank account
and as per the same, an amount of Rs.190/- has been marked
as lien amount by the Cyber Crime Department. That thereafter
the petitioners gave a notice to the respondent No.2 bank to
unfreeze their bank account, however, no action is taken.
Aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present Special Civil
Application.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no
reasons have been informed by the respondent No.1 - Inspector
of Police, PS Narsmpet, Warangal Commissionerate, about the
debit freeze of the petitioners' bank account, which is their hard
earned saving. He has further submitted that the disputed
amount is only of Rs.3,800/-, which is a suspicious transaction
as per the respondent No.1, however, the same has resulted into
freezing of the entire saving bank account of the petitioners. He
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
submits that by communication dated 04.09.2024, the
respondent No.2 bank has given a bifurcation of the lien amount
which amounts to Rs.1,961.18ps. He submits that because of
such small amount, the petitioners have been put into
inconvenience. He submits that the petitioners undertake that
the bank may freeze the amount of suspicious transaction and
rest of the money in the saving bank account of the petitioners
be made available to them.
4. Though served, the respondent No.1 has not appeared.
Learned counsels for the respondent No.2 bank as well as
respondent No.3 Reserve Bank of India have submitted that
appropriate orders may be passed.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the
documents on record.
6. It appears that in some criminal investigation undertaken
by the respondent No.1, it has transpired that some amount of
the crime proceeds has been transferred to the bank account of
the petitioners. Accordingly, the respondent No.1 has made a
communication dated 01.02.2024 to the respondent No.2 bank
to debit freeze the above account till the completion of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
investigation. The respondent No.2 bank has given a statement
to the petitioners which shows that on 14.08.2023, an amount of
Rs.3,800/- has been received by NEFT in the petitioner's
account from ONE97 COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED which is
suspected to be part of the crime proceeds. For such a small
amount, the complete bank account of the petitioners has been
freezed pending the investigation. Freezing of the bank account
has resulted into freezing of the savings of the petitioners as well
as affecting their livelihood and business.
7. The statute empowers the investigating agency to request
the bank for freezing of the bank account pending investigation.
The said action is also coupled with a duty to intimate the same
forthwith to the Court having jurisdiction in such crime.
Further, there cannot be freezing of the account by the
Investigating Officer perpetually and without intimating to such
account holder as to the reason why the bank account has been
freezed and to what extent it has been freezed. In the present
case, the intimation to freeze the account vide notice under
Section 91 and 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been
intimated by the respondent No.1 to the respondent No.2 bank
on 01.02.2024. However, despite repeated requests from the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
petitioners, till date, the respondent No.1 has not intimated any
details to the petitioners as to why the bank account of the
petitioners has been freezed and for how long the said account
will be kept under freeze even though more than 1 year has
elapsed from the date of such notice.
8. This Court is of the considered opinion that an order/
notice freezing the entire account of the citizen during an
investigation without quantifying the amount and the period is
in violation of the citizen's fundamental right to trade, business
and livelihood as such an action results in untold hardship to
the person having serious and adverse implications on the
person and his family. The said action undermines his right to
earn and live with dignity which is an integral part of right to life
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Further, the continued freezing of the entire bank account
without intimation of involvement of the petitioner being an
accused or accomplice in the crime or he has knowingly received
the funds as part of any illegal activity will also render such an
action to be bad in law and cannot be justified or sustained.
9. In the factual matrix of the present case and taking into
consideration the communications placed on record and further
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14955/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2025
undefined
so as to meet with the ends of justice, this Court directs the
respondent Nos.1 and 2 to defreeze the bank account of the
petitioners mentioned in the notice dated 01.02.2024 by marking
a lien restricted to the disputed amount credited in their account
which is stated to be Rs.3,800/-. The said amount shall remain
as a lien till the investigation by the respondent No.1 is over. As
a necessary corollary, the petitioners are permitted to operate
their bank account fully, except the lien amount of Rs.3,800/-.
For the aforesaid reasons and observations, the writ
petition stands disposed of in above mentioned terms. No order
as to costs.
Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
