HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10413 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the writ petitioner has sought for the following substantial reliefs :- "I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite party no. 1 to unfreeze the account of the petitioner bearing account no. 2278010019487 IFSC code - BARB0JMCHA in the Bank Of Baroda, Branch-Jamunapur, District- Raebareli. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite party no-1 to permit the petitioner to operate his account no. 2278010019487 in the Bank Of Baroda, Branch- Jamunapur, District-Raebareli and also release the amount deposited by the petitioner." 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bank has placed reliance upon a judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Marufa Begum vs. Union of India and others reported in 2025:AHC:190289-DB (Writ-C No.37053 of 2025). The relevant portion of the said order is delineated below :- "12. This provision is incorporated verbatim under Section 106 of Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. From a bare reading of Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Suresh Chandra Srivastava, Pratibha Maurya, Sumit Chauhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : Prashant Kumar Srivastava, C.S.C. Shadab .....Petitioner(s) Bank Of Baroda Thru. Bank Manager Branch Jamunapar Raebareli And Another .....Respondent(s) the aforesaid provision it is clear that a police officer is entitled to seize property of accused persons during investigation by passing orders and the only duty is to report such seizure to Magistrate concerned. There is no obligation cast upon police to seek prior order from Magistrate for seizure of property. 13. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of legal position as discussed above, in our considered view respondent bank has acted in accordance with law in freezing the petitioner?s account pursuant to the directions issued and request made by the Cyber Crime Department and if the petitioner is aggrieved by freezing and wants to get her account defreezed, it is open to her to approach the investigating authorities or a court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate relief in accordance with law as observed above. Hence, we do not find any good ground to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to grant relief as prayed for. 14. Accordingly, the writ petition is consigned to records with liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedies as may be available to her in law." 4. We are at consensus ad idem with the order passed by the coordinate Bench. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to act in accordance with law keeping in mind the coordinate Bench Judgment discussed above. November 10, 2025 cks/- WRIC No. 10413 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench