Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 164633 (ALL)

GAURAV SARDAN AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/8760/2025 · 2025-09-26

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8760 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri Shiv Kumar Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri S.N. Tilhari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/ opposite party Nos.1 to 3. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, the notices to opposite party Nos.4 to 7 are hereby dispensed with. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:- "(A) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondent Bank and the Investigating Agency to unfreeze the petitioners' Bank Account Nos.6912145402 with Kotak Mahindra Bank Panchkula Haryana Branch, Sector-20, IFS Code- KKBK0004353, and Bank Account No.15651000051858 with HDFC Bank, Panchkula, Haryana Branch, IFSC HDFC0000673 (of the petitioner No.1), Bank Account No.045599000001673 with Yes Bank Rajdhani Enclave, New, IFS Code-YESB0000455 (jointly of the petitioners) and Bank Account No.15651870000012 with HDFC Bank Panchkula Haryana Branch Sector- 20, IFS Code-HDFC0000673 (of the petitioner No.2)." 4. At the very outset, Shri Tilhari has stated that the petitioners are the resident of Haryana and the alleged cause of action accrued at Kanpur, no F.I.R. has been lodged in the issue in question and the alleged freezing of the account has not been done pursuant to any direction being issued by the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shiv Kumar Vishwakarma, Avneesh Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Gaurav Sardan And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Investigating Agency, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. 5. The aforesaid contention of Shri Tilhari has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed being not maintainable. 7. However, it is always open for the petitioners to avail the remedy available with them before appropriate authority/ court of law. September26,2025 Suresh/ CRLP No. 8760 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench