Rinku Sengar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:18141)
2026 Latest Caselaw 5953 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 5953 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rinku Sengar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:18141) on 16 April, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2026:RJ-JD:18141]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1605/2026

Rinku Sengar Sister/o Shri Shyam Singh Sengar, Aged About 23
Years, Resident Of Khedakhut Mataji Ke Piche,jawahar Nagar,
District Bhilwara (Raj).
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
2.       Indian Overseas Bank, Registered Address- Anna Salai,
         Chennai, Tamilnadu-600002.
3.       Branch Manager, Indian Overseas                         Bank,    Chittorgarh
         Branch, District Chittorgarh Raj..
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Vishal Sharma
                                Mr. Robin Singh
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Shree Ram Choudhary, PP


                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

16/04/2026

1. The instant criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS has been

preferred seeking a direction for the respondents to defreeze the

bank accounts of the petitioners.

2. The facts of the case are that alleging certain fraudulent

transactions, the bank account of the petitioner has been freezed,

details of which are provided hereinunder :-

      Bank Name                     Branch                        Account No.
Indian Overseas Bank             Chittorgarh                243102000000422

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material placed on the record.

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 08:32:02 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:18141] (2 of 4) [CRLW-1605/2026]

4. No doubt, the statutes empower the investigation agency to

request the Bank to freeze the account pending investigation and

intimate it forthwith to the jurisdiction Court, but there cannot be

freezing of account perpetually without intimating the account

holders what for their account is freezed and what extent it has to

be freezed because great inconvenience and hardship is caused to

the day to day financial life of the persons concerned, since the

very life-line of the business gets severed by such unilateral

orders of account freezing passed by the Police.

5. The freezing of a citizen's bank account, in the absence of

any cogent reasons and without establishing even a prima facie

nexus of such account with the commission of any cognizable

offence, amounts to a grave and unwarranted intrusion into the

fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Such an

action, taken in a mechanical and arbitrary manner, not only

cripples the financial autonomy of an individual but also directly

impinges upon the right to life and personal liberty enshrined

under Article 21 and the freedom to carry on trade, occupation

and business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

The power to interdict the operation of a bank account is an

exceptional one, to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection

and strictly in accordance with law, and only upon recording

reasons demonstrating a live and proximate link between the

account and the alleged criminal activity. Any freezing order

passed dehors such safeguards betrays a colourable exercise of

power, is manifestly arbitrary, and cannot be sustained in the eyes

of law.

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 08:32:02 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:18141] (3 of 4) [CRLW-1605/2026]

6. In the case at hand, though only a certain amount is

disputed and the same has been kept on hold, but due to the

blanket order to freeze the account, the respondent Banks have

freezed the accounts in their entirety. Therefore, the petitioners

herein are unable to operate their accounts and deal with the

money lying therein. Under the guise of investigation, order

freezing the entire account without quantifying the amount and

period cannot be passed. Such order will be construed as violation

of the fundamental rights of trade and business as well as

violation of livelihood. This court is of the considered opinion that

keeping only the disputed amount on hold would serve the

interest of the parties.

7. Upon due consideration of the submissions advanced by

learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material

available on record, it is directed that the amount in dispute shall

remain under freeze; however, the petitioner shall be permitted to

operate the said bank account for all other lawful transactions.

The respondent-bank shall ensure that only the debit operations to

the extent of the disputed amount in the account bearing the

number mentioned hereinbelow remain interdicted, while the

account shall otherwise remain fully operational for all remaining

purposes.

8. The following bank accounts of the petitioner shall remain

unfrozen: -

  Bank Name          Branch                          Account No.
   Indian                 243102000000422
              Chittorgarh
Overseas Bank




                      (Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 08:32:02 AM)

                                    [2026:RJ-JD:18141]                   (4 of 4)                       [CRLW-1605/2026]

9. Accordingly, the concerned Superintendent of Police is

hereby directed to forthwith communicate this order to the

concerned Bank Officer and ensure that the account in question is

de-freezed immediately, without any further delay or impediment.

10. In view of the above, instant writ petition is disposed of.

11. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 40-divya/-

(Uploaded on 21/04/2026 at 08:32:02 AM)