Devraj Singh Shaktawat vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10355)
2026 Latest Caselaw 3231 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3231 Raj
Judgement Date : 25 February, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Devraj Singh Shaktawat vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10355) on 25 February, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2026:RJ-JD:10355]

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                           JODHPUR
                 S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 852/2026

Devraj Singh Shaktawat S/o Labh Singh, Aged About 25 Years,
Resident Of D-493, Shastrinagar, District Bhilwara Raj..
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.          State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2.          Bandhan Bank, Registered Address- Adventz Infinity @ 5
            Florrs 12-14 Bn 5 Sector V Salt Lake City Kolkata
            7000091
3.          Branch Manager, Bandhan Bank Bhilwara Branch Dist.
            Bhilwara Raj.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Vishal Sharma
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Shri Ram Choudhary, PP



                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

25/02/2026

1. The instant criminal writ petition has been preferred seeking

a direction for the respondents to defreeze the bank account of

the petitioner.

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

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

details of which is provided hereinunder :-

 S.          Bank Name                 Branch                       Account No.
 No.
     1.                         Bhilwara Branch,                   20200118083338
            Bandhan Bank
                                District Bhilwara

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material placed on the record.

(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 12:56:45 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:10355] (2 of 4) [CRLW-852/2026]

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 26/02/2026 at 12:56:45 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:10355] (3 of 4) [CRLW-852/2026]

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 Bank has

freezed the accounts in their entirety. Therefore, the petitioner

herein is unable to operate his account 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: -

S. No.       Bank Name              Branch                         Account No.
     1.                       Bhilwara Branch,              20200118083338
            Bandhan Bank
                              District Bhilwara




                        (Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 12:56:45 PM)

                                    [2026:RJ-JD:10355]                   (4 of 4)                        [CRLW-852/2026]

9. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police is hereby directed

to forthwith communicate this order to the concerned Branch

Manager 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. All pending applications are also disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 208-Rashi/-

(Uploaded on 26/02/2026 at 12:56:45 PM)