[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajendra Panwar vs Branch Manager/Nodal Officer ... on 15 April, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:17271]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7135/2026
Rajendra Panwar S/o Kishan Lal Panwar, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o 1Gh_16_Madhuban Basni_1P, Basni 1 Phase, Jodhpur
Rajasthan, 342001.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Branch Manager/nodal Officer, Central Bank Of India, Plot
No. 192, District Shopping Centre, Opp. Saraswati
Hospital, Saraswati Nagar, 1St Phase Basni, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan, 342011.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police,
Police Directorate, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma
Mr. Pawan Kumar Patel
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
15/04/2026
1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following
reliefs:-
"A. It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed
that your lordship may graciously be pleased to accept
and allow this writ petition and:
B. By an appropriate writ, order ог direction, the
respondents may be directed to remove the freeze on
the bank account and money of petitioner.
C. By an appropriate writ, order ог direction, the
respondents may kindly be directed to pay the 10%
interest per annum on the amount in the petitioner's
account which has been put on freeze from the date of
the freeze till the date of release.
D. Any other order which this hon'ble court deems just
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.
E. The cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to
the petitioner."
(Uploaded on 15/04/2026 at 02:15:13 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:17271] (2 of 2) [CW-7135/2026]
2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition
with a direction to the Central Bank of India (Respondent No.1) to
keep the disputed amount (the amount which was transferred
illegally in the bank account of the petitioner) frozen and allow the
petitioner to make transactions from his bank account from the
remaining balance.
3. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent - Bank
has not received the information regarding the exact figure of the
disputed amount, which the Investigating Officer/Police alleges to
be receipt(s) of the offence, the bank shall send a communication
to the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, to indicate the
amount to be earmarked for lien, while endorsing a copy of the
instant order.
4. Upon receipt of such communication/letter, the concerned
Investigating Officer/Police shall be under an obligation to apprise
the respondent - Bank about the amount to be kept in lien, within
a period of seven days of receiving the communication from the
respondent - Bank. The respondent - bank shall thereafter do the
needful as directed herein above.
5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank
does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating
Officer/Police, then it shall be duty bound to act in accordance
with the instant order.
6. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand
disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
8-divya/-
(Uploaded on 15/04/2026 at 02:15:13 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
