Kerala High Court
Sulaikha S vs The Manager, Csb Bank on 31 October, 2025
2025:KER:82358
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SULAIKHA S
AGED 32 YEARS
D/O M SALEEM, HOUSE NO.9/155, SAI NAGAR,
KALLEKULANGAR,APUTHUPARIYARAM, KALLEKULANGARA,
PALAKKAD, KERALA, PIN - 678 009
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASHIS A.
SHRI.SREEJITH K.
SMT.FATHIMA PARVEEN P.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE MANAGER, CSB BANK
TIRUR BRANCH TARIFF BUILDING,PAN BAZAR, TIRUR,
PIN - 676 101
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU
NO. 1, KAMARAJAR SALAI, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU,
PIN - 600 004
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER ,CHATURSHRINGI POLICE STATION
VIDHYAPEETH ROAD, GANESHKHIND ROAD, NEAR PUNE
UNIVERSITY, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 411 007
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
2
4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,KOTWALI POLICE STATION
KISHANPOLE BAZAR RD, CHANDPOLE BAZAR, CHANDPOLE,
CHANDPOL, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN, PIN - 302 001
BY ADVS.
SRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN- SC
SMT.G.SHEEBA, GOVERNEMNT PLEADER.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 31.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the
debit freezing/lien of his Bank account with the
Respondent/Bank at the requisition of the Police
Authorities. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner
is not an accused in the Crime registered by the Police
authorities against some other persons, in which the
requisition was made; that the Petitioner is in no way
connected with the said Crime; and that the debit
freezing/lien of the account is in violation of Sections 106
& 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(BNSS) and Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
2. The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Bank, after
getting instructions from the Bank, confirmed that the Bank
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
has received three Requisitions from the Respondent
Nos.2 to 4 for a total amount of Rs.3,08,395/- for debit
freezing of the account of the Petitioner mentioned in the
Writ Petition, and hence, the Bank has effected debit
freezing of the account of the Petitioner.
The available balance in the account of the Petitioner
mentioned in the Writ Petition is Rs.1,16,736.50/-.
3. This Court considered the same issue in Dr. Sajeer v.
Reserve Bank of India [2024 (1) KLT 826], and this Court issued
the following directions:
"a. The respondent Banks arrayed in these cases, are directed
to confine the order of freeze against the accounts of the
respective Petitioners, only to the extent of the amounts
mentioned in the order/requisition issued to them by the Police
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
Authorities. This shall be done forthwith, so as to enable the
Petitioners to deal with their accounts, and transact therein,
beyond that limit.
b. The respondent - Police Authorities concerned are hereby
directed to inform the respective Banks as to whether freezing
of accounts of the Petitioners in these Writ Petitions will require
to be continued even in the afore manner; and if so, for what
further time, within a period of eight months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
c. On the Banks receiving the afore information/intimation from
the Police Authorities, they will adhere with it and complete
necessary action - either continuing the freeze for such period
as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be.
d. If, however, no information or intimation is received by their
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
Banks in terms of direction (b) above, the Petitioners or such
among them, will be at full liberty to approach this Court again;
for which purpose, all their contentions in these Writ Petitions
are left open and reserved to them, to impel in future."
4. Subsequently, this Court considered the same issue in
Nazeer K.T. v. Manager, Federal Bank, Makkaraparamba Branch
[2024 KHC 768].
5. In Nazeer K.T., this Court considered the scope of Section
102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(corresponding to Section 106 of the BNSS), with
reference to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC
685], Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat [(2018) 2 SCC 372]
and Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen and Others [(2024) 7 SCC
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
23], concurred with the view in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and added
the following two more directions:
"(i) The Police officer concerned shall inform the Banks
whether the seizure of 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 the Section 102 is
informed to Bank within one month of receipt of a copy of the
judgment, the Bank shall lift the debit freeze imposed on the
Petitioner's account.
(ii) 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 officer concerned and
retain proof of such service."
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
6. In Abhiraj Rajan v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC 1676], this Court
considered the decisions in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and Nazeer
K.T. (supra) and disposed of the Writ Petition, incorporating
the directions contained in both Dr. Sajeer (supra) and
Nazeer K.T. (supra).
7. I find that the Petitioner in this case is similarly placed, in
all respects, with the Petitioners in the aforesaid three
decisions of this Court in Dr. Sajeer (supra), Nazeer K.T.
(supra) and Abhiraj Rajan (supra), and the Petitioner is
entitled to get the same directions in this writ petition.
8. It is contended that there are chances of uncommunicated
or further requisitions for debit freezing/lien with respect to
the same account, and in such case, the directions of this
Court in this judgment may not stand in the way of the
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
Banks effecting debit freezing/lien. It is contended that
utilization of the frozen/lien amount may be at the disposal
of the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court. I find force in these
submissions, and I find it expedient to include two
additional directions to the aforesaid directions in Dr. Sajeer
(supra) and Nazeer K.T. (supra).
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the
following directions:
i) The Respondent/Bank is directed to confine the order of debit
freeze/lien against the account of the Petitioner only to the
extent of the amounts mentioned in the orders/requisitions
issued to the Bank by the Police Authorities and it shall be
done forthwith so as to enable the Petitioner to deal with his
account and transact therein beyond that limit.
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
ii) The respondents - Police Authorities concerned are hereby
directed to inform the Bank as to whether freezing/lien of the
account of the Petitioner will require to be continued even in
the aforesaid manner; and if so, for what further time, within a
period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
iii) On the Bank receiving the aforesaid information/intimation from
the Police Authorities, the Bank will adhere to it and complete
necessary action - either continuing the freeze/lien for such
period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may
be.
iv) If, however, no information or intimation is received by the
Bank in terms of direction (ii) above, the Petitioner will be at full
liberty to approach this Court again; for which purpose, all his
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
contentions in the Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to
him, to impel in the future.
v) The Police Officer concerned shall inform the Bank whether the
seizure of 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 102 Cr.P.C.
(Section 106 BNSS) is informed to the Bank within one month
of receipt of a copy of the judgment, the Bank shall lift the debit
freeze/lien imposed on the Petitioner's account.
vi) 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 officer concerned and retain proof of
such service.
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
vii) The directions of this Court in this judgment will not stand in the
way of the Bank effecting debit freezing/lien based on the
requisitions communicated in the future to the Bank with
respect to the same account of the Petitioner, and in such
case, the Petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the same.
viii) The frozen/lien amount, if any, lying in the account of the
Petitioner in accordance with the aforementioned directions,
shall be at the disposal of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
Sd/-
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
JUDGE
mus
2025:KER:82358
WP(C) NO. 29790 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29790/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
30/11/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
BANK
EXHIBIT P-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
12/12/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
BANK
EXHIBIT P-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
23/12/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
BANK
