Kerala High Court
Sajir Babu C.K vs The Kottakkal Co-Op Urban Bank Ltd on 12 August, 2025
2025:KER:60981
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SAJIR BABU C.K.,
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIMOHAMED,
RESIDING AT
CHELOOR KALATHIL HOUSE, PULIKKALPARAMBA,
MANKADA, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 679324
BY ADVS.
SHRI.HAMZATH ALI V.K.
SMT.AYISHA AFRIN A.V.K.
SHRI.MUHAMMAD SHAMEEL K.
SHRI.SIDDIQUE C.
SHRI.ABDULLA FUHAD K.
SMT.AYISHA THASLEEMA N.P.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KOTTAKKAL CO-OP URBAN BANK LTD
KARATHODE BRANCH, OORAKAM,
MELMURI (PO), MALAPPURAM, KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, PIN - 676501
2 UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME SECRETARY,
PIN - 110001
3 INDIAN CYBER CRIME CO-ORDINATION CENTRE (14C)
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, 1ST FLOOR,
MAJOR DHYAN CHAND NATIONAL STATION,
INDIA GATE CIRCLE, NEW DELHI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS NODAL OFFICER, PIN - 110002
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
2025:KER:60981
2
4 THENI CITY POLICE STATION
DINDIGUL - THENI MAIN ROAD,
NRT NAGAR, THENI, TAMIL NADU,
REPRESENTED BY ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PIN - 625531
BY ADVS.
SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J.
SMT.SINDHU K.S.
SMT.SMINI JOSE
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV O M SHALINA, DSGI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
12.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
2025:KER:60981
3
JUDGMENT
This writ petition was filed aggrieved by freezing of the
account of the petitioner maintained with Kottakkal Co-operative
Urban Bank Ltd., Karathode Branch. Sri Devaprasanth, appeared
for the 1st respondent. The learned Central Government Counsel
appeared for respondents 2 and 3. Notice was served on the 4 th
respondent, however, there is no appearance for the 4 th
respondent. On 25.04.2025, an order was passed in this case
directing that no amount shall be debited from the account of
the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner pointed out
that the disputed amount involved as evident from Exhibit P2 is
Rs.84,945/-. The learned Counsel for the Bank submitted that,
the freezing was imposed on the basis of the requisition received
from the 4th respondent and no other requisitions were received
from any other Police authority. In the above facts and
circumstances of the case, I find that this writ petition can be
disposed of by issuing appropriate directions.
2. In Muhammad Ali Vallukandiyil v.
Grievance Officer, National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
- NCCRP [2025 SCC OnLine Ker 1319], a learned Single Judge of
this Court considered a similar case, with reference to several
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
2025:KER:60981
decisions by Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court addressing
the issue and disposed the writ petition by issuing a slew of
directions. I find that this writ petition can also be disposed of by
issuing similar directions.
I hence dispose of the writ petition with the following
directions:
(i) The 1st respondent Bank is directed to confine the
freezing of the petitioner's bank account only to
the extent of the amount mentioned in the
order/requisition issued by the Police Authorities.
This shall be done forthwith, so as to enable the
petitioner to transact through his account beyond
the said limit;
(ii) The Police Authorities concerned are hereby
directed to inform the Bank as to whether
freezing of the petitioner's account will be
required to be continued even in the aforesaid
manner; and if so, for how long;
(iii) On the Bank receiving the aforesaid
information/intimation from the Police
Authorities, they shall comply with it and
complete necessary action - either continuing the
freezing or lien for such period as mentioned
therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be;
(iv) The police officers concerned shall inform the
Bank whether the seizure of the amount in the
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
2025:KER:60981
bank account has been reported to the
jurisdictional Magistrate and if not, the time limit
within which the seizure will be reported. If no
intimation as to the compliance or the proposal
to comply with Section 106 of the BNSS is
received by the Bank within two months of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, the Bank shall
lift the debit freeze or remove the lien, as the
case may be, on the petitioner's bank account;
(v) In order to enable the Police to comply with the
above direction, the Bank, as well as the
petitioner, shall forthwith serve a copy of this
judgment to the police officer concerned and
retain proof of such service.
It is clarified that the police authority concerned shall
be at liberty to approach this Court to seek review of this
judgment if required.
The respondent Bank is not precluded from freezing or
imposing lien on the petitioner's account on receipt of any
subsequent requests/ orders from any law enforcing agencies or
courts.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
ANK
WP(C) NO. 16703 OF 2025
2025:KER:60981
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16703/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE
PETITIONER'S SAVINGS ACCOUNT, HAVING
ACCOUNT NO. 201610101003285 MAINTAINED IN
THE THE KOTTAKKAL CO-OP URBAN BANK LTD
BANK, KARATHODE BRANCH, ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
COMPLAINT DETAIL ALLEGED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 01.03.2025
