Muhammed Anees M vs Federal Bank
2025 Latest Caselaw 9966 Ker

Kerala High Court

Muhammed Anees M vs Federal Bank on 23 October, 2025

WPC No.22958 of 2025

                                        1

                                                             2025:KER:79100

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM

         THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1947

                           WP(C) NO. 22958 OF 2025


PETITIONER:

              MUHAMMED ANEES M
              AGED 29 YEARS
              S/O ANEES , MANGOTTIL HOUSE, PERIMBALAM P.O, MUNDUPARAMBU,
              MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676509


              BY ADVS.
              SRI.NAVANEETH.N.NATH
              SMT.ABHIRAMI S.
              SHRI.ABDUL LATHEEF P.M.
              SHRI.PRASEED V.P.




RESPONDENTS:

     1        FEDERAL BANK
              REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, MALAPPURAM BRANCH,
              KIZHAKKETHALA, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676519

     2        SUB INSPECTOR,
              SPECIAL OPERATION GROUP HADGOOD ROAD, ANAND, GUJRAT, PIN -
              398001


OTHER PRESENT:

              SRI TONY AUGUSTIN GOVERNMENT PLEADER
              SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE, SC


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.10.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC No.22958 of 2025

                                      2

                                                           2025:KER:79100




                                 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 standing counsel for the Respondent/Bank, after

getting instructions from the Bank, confirmed that there is only

lien of Rs.2,69,000/- in the account of the Petitioner mentioned

2025:KER:79100

in the Writ Petition at the Requisition of the Respondent No.2 .

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 further time, within a period of

eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2025:KER:79100

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 Court in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D.

Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC 685], Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat [(2018)

2025:KER:79100

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."

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

2025:KER:79100

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 additional directions to the aforesaid

directions in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and Nazeer K.T. (supra).

2025:KER:79100

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 complete necessary

2025:KER:79100

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 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.

2025:KER:79100

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.

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

jma

2025:KER:79100

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22958/2025

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER COMMUNICATION DATED 14/05/2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SEND BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.05.2025