Kerala High Court
Ey Key Agencies vs The Bank Manager on 16 October, 2025
2025:KER:77647
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 24TH ASWINA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 28214 OF 2025
PETITIONER
EY KEY AGENCIES,
V.P.15/101A, CHERUVAYOOR, KANNATHUMPARA,
VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, MUHAMMED BASHEER,
AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. RAYIN, ELAMKUZHY HOUSE,
KANNATHUMPARA, VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 673645
BY ADV SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ
RESPONDENTS
1 THE BANK MANAGER,
SOUTH INDIAN BANK, AREEKODE BRANCH VILAKATHIL
ARCADE, MUKKAM ROAD, AREEKODE P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673639
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
SOUTH CYBER POLICE STATION, MUMBAI, FIRST FLOOR,
BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX RD, OPPOSITE ICICI BANK,
G BLOCK BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST,
MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA EMAIL ID:
[email protected], PIN - 400051
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
CYBER POLICE STATION, NAVI MUMBAI, SAWALI BUILDING,
1ST FLOOR, SECTOR-5, NEAR DR. D.Y. PATIL HOSPITAL,
NERUL, NAVI MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA,
EMAIL ID: [email protected],
PIN - 400706
2025:KER:77647
WP(C) No.28214 of 2025
2
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUNIL SHANKER, SC
SMT.VIDYA GANGADHARAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:77647
WP(C) No.28214 of 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16th day of October, 2025
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
has received one Requisition from the Respondent No.2
for an amount of Rs.3,23,764/- and another Requisition
from the Respondent No.3 for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-,
2025:KER:77647
totalling Rs.4,23,764/-, 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.
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
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
2025:KER:77647
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
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
2025:KER:77647
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
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:77647
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
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
2025:KER:77647
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.
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
2025:KER:77647
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
contentions in the Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to
him, to impel in 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
2025:KER:77647
this judgment to the officer concerned and retain proof of such
service.
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
Cak
2025:KER:77647
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28214/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.07.2025
ISSUED BY THE 1STRESPONDENT TO PETITIONER
