Kerala High Court
Muhasin M.C vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2025
2025:KER:61797
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 21431 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
MUHASIN M.C
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.HAMEED, AGED 35,MEETHALE CHANGOTH HOUSE,
NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA REPRESENTED BY POWER
OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MUFEED MEETHALE CHANGOTH, AGED
25 YEARS, S/O.HAMEED, MEETHALE CHANGOTH HOUSE,
NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673504
BY ADV.
SHRI.NESAMUDHEEN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 ICICI BANK
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, NADAPURAM BRANCH,
CITY TOWER, OPP HP PETROL PUMB, KALLACH ROAD,
NADAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 673504
3 CEN POLICE STATION CHIKKABALLAPURA
REPRESENTED THROUGH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF
POLICE CIVIL POLICE IN CHIKKABALLAPUR, KARNATAKA
RAMAMURTHY RD, CHIKKABALLAPUR, KARNATAKA,
PIN - 562101
4 STATE POLICE CHIEF, WEST BENGAL
18, LALBAZAR STREET, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL,
2025:KER:61797
2
W.P.(C) No.21431 of 2025
PIN - 700001
BY ADVS.
SHRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
P.NARAYANAN, SPL. G.P. TO DGP AND ADDL. P.P.
SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR)
SMT.T.A.LUXY
SHRI.SURESH SUKUMAR
SRI.ANZIL SALIM
SHRI.SANJAY SELLEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 14.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:61797
3
W.P.(C) No.21431 of 2025
JUDGMENT
Petitioner maintains an account with the ICICI Bank,
Nadapuram Branch. Petitioner approached this Court
aggrieved by freezing of his account.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor appeared for the 1st
respondent. Learned Standing Counsel appeared for the 2 nd
respondent. Notice was issued to respondents 3 and 4.
Service is complete. The 4th respondent also engaged the
learned Public Prosecutor to represent them. There is no
appearance for the 3rd respondent.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted
that the requisition made by the 4 th respondent was with
respect to an amount of Rs.50,000/-.
4. The learned Standing Counsel appeared for the 2 nd
respondent- Bank on instructions submitted that the total
amount over which the lien has been marked is
Rs.1,56,950/-.
5. Since there is no appearance for the 3 rd respondent
in spite of service of notice, I find that this writ petition can be
disposed of taking note of the submissions made by the
2025:KER:61797
learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel
appearing for the 2nd respondent - Bank by issuing
appropriate directions.
4. I hence dispose of the writ petition with the
following directions:
(i) The 2nd 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;
2025:KER:61797
(iv) The police officers concerned shall inform the
Bank whether the seizure of the amount in
the 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.
5. It is clarified that the police authority concerned
shall be at liberty to approach this Court to seek review of
this judgment if required.
6. The respondent Bank is not precluded from
freezing or imposing lien on the petitioner's account on
2025:KER:61797
receipt of any subsequent requests/ orders from any law
enforcing agencies or courts.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
PV
2025:KER:61797
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21431/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
DATED 04.06.2025 IN FAVOR OF THE POWER
OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. MUFEED MEETHALE
CHANGOTH, BROTHER OF THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT
STATEMENT DATED 04.06.2025
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
13.11.2024 RECEIVED FROM THE
RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE DATED
10.04.2025 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT
BANK
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED
22.05.2025
