[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:12016) on 13 March, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:12016]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5637/2026
Ramu Ram S/o Kunana Ram, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of
Shrinagar, Hirani, District Deedwana Kuchaman Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police,
Police Directorate, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Hdfc Bank, Through Its Branch Manager (Branch Code-
4379), Kuchaman City District Deedwana Kuchaman
Rajasthan.
3. National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, Represented By
Its Director, National Highway-8, Mahalipur, New Delhi,
Pin- 110037.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deependra Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : --
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
13/03/2026
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 appropriate, order
or direction-an
(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondent may kindly be directed to de-freeze the bank
account bearing account number 50100507178991 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 13/03/2026 at 05:14:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:12016] (2 of 2) [CW-5637/2026]
with a direction to the HDFC Bank (Respondent No.2) 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
41-himanshu/-
(Uploaded on 13/03/2026 at 05:14:00 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
