[2025:RJ-JP:30212] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9953/2025 Akash S/o Harish Chand, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Dehra, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Bank Of Baroda, Through Branch Manager, Branch Nadbai, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan 321602 2. Inspector Of Police, Cyber Ps Lb Nagar, Rachkonda, Telangana ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Adarsh Singhal with Ms.Anisha Yadav & Mr.Sushil Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr.Harjeit Sharma Mr.Suman Shekhawat, Dy.GC. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/08/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that yours Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition by calling the entire recoord and after perusal of the same:- (i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondent Bank to immediately unfreeze the currrent account of the Petition bearing Account No.39030100010111, held with Bank of Baorda branch Nadbai, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. [2025:RJ-JP:30212] (2 of 4) [CW-9953/2025] (ii) Direct the Respondent Bank to provide written reasons for the freezing of the account and any communication recieived from Cyber Crime authorities, if any. (iii) Declare that the action of the Respondent Bank is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (g), and 300A of the Constitution of India. (iv) Award costs of this petition in favour of the Petitioner. (v) Pass such further or other orders as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (vi) Any other appropriate order or direction which is deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstance by this Hon’ble Court may also be passed in favour of the petitioner’s committee.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never misused his bank account for the purpose of illegal transactions and has not committed any cyber crime. Learned counsel submits that it appears that certain crime was committed by an accused and a sum of Rs.30,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the petitioner, i.e., 39030100010111 and only on this count, the respondents have freezed the entire account of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that because of such action on the part of the respondent-Bank, the petitioner is not in a position to operate his bank account which is causing serious financial loss to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Agencies and will appear before the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies as and when called upon. He, therefore, [2025:RJ-JP:30212] (3 of 4) [CW-9953/2025] submits that the disputed amount which has been received in petitioner’s account may be freezed but, the amount other than the disputed amount may be allowed to be withdrawn. He further submits that the petitioner may be allowed to operate his bank account for the transaction of money. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank opposes the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits an FIR with regard to a cyber crime has been registered with Police and on instructions of the concerned police station, the bank account of the petitioner has been seized, therefore under these circumstances, the petitioner cannot be allowed to operate his bank account and the writ petition is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the disputed amount is of Rs.30,000/- only for which the entire account of the petitioner has been freezed. The respondents are not going to gain anything by freezing the entire account of the petitioner. The bank has only concern with regard to the disputed amount, which was deposited in the bank account of the petitioner. 6. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with by issuing directions to the respondent-Bank to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner bearing No.39030100010111 and allow the petitioner to operate the transaction in his bank account by freezing only the disputed amount i.e., Rs.30,000/- which is allegedly involved in a fraudulent transaction. [2025:RJ-JP:30212] (4 of 4) [CW-9953/2025] 7. It is made clear that the petitioner will co-operate with the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies and will appear before them as and when required. It is also ordered that the petitioner shall not close or discontinue his bank account till the Investigating Agencies and Bank Authorities permit the petitioner to do so. It is further ordered that after the investigation, if the petitioner is found involved in any illegal transaction, he shall be liable to pay the amount involved in the illegal transaction and will face the enquiry/investigation as per the law. It is further ordered that the respondent-Bank will be free to transfer the disputed amount from the account of the petitioner to the account from which it has been transferred in his account. 8. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /67