[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bidami vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:6905) on 6 February, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:6905]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2681/2026
Bidami W/o Shri Prabhu Ram, Aged About 65 Years, R/o
Bheraniyo Ki Dhaniya, Hanuman Sagar, Post Tapoo, Tehsil Baori,
District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police,
Police Directorate, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, Represented By
Its Director, National Highway-8, Mahalipur, New Delhi,
Pin-110037.
3. Branch Manager/nodal Officer, HDFC Bank Ltd, Keshav
Complex Plot No. 15, Nimbera House Mandore Road,
Paota, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh
For Respondent(s) : --
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
06/02/2026
1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following
reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the present Writ
Petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate,
order or direction-
(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondent may kindly be directed to de-freeze the bank
account bearing account number 50100281997180 of
the petitioner in respondent bank.
(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondent may kindly be directed to not freeze the
bank account of the petitioner in future without prior
notice.
(iii) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court
deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of
the petitioner."
2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 06:43:18 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6905] (2 of 2) [CW-2681/2026]
with a direction to the HDFC Bank Ltd. (Respondent No. 3) 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 her 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
39-sonia/-
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 06:43:18 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
