LOKESH KUMAR DHAKAD SON OF SHRI JAGDISH LAL DHAKAD v. HDFC BANK
CW/10326/2025 · 2025-07-25
Anoop Kumar Dhand
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23656 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23656 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10326/2025 Lokesh Kumar Dhakad Son Of Shri Jagdish Lal Dhakad, Resident Of Plot No. 61A Naryan Vihar Tuti Puliya Ke Pass 100 Feet Muhana Mandi Road, Sanganer Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302029 ----Petitioner Versus
1. Hdfc Bank, Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office At Shop No. 13-15 Opp. Sanganer Police Station, Airport Circle Behind Shani Mandir Jaipur 302029 (Rajasthan)
2. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Goshamahal District Hyderabad, Telangana. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar for Mr. Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG with Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma Mr. Naman Yadav JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order 25/07/2025
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-
“1. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondent may kindly be directed to unfreeze the bank account of the petitioner, and further be directed not to mark lien on the aforesaid amount, and the petitioner be let free to use the same;
2. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may be directed to pay the interest on the amount they have held without any reason at the rate of 15 percent per annum.
3. 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 of 3) [CW-10326/2025]
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking direction against the respondent-Bank for defreezing his Account No.50100201399078 with HDFC Bank, Sanganer Circle, Jaipur. Counsel submits that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with any cyber crime committed by anyone, even then his account has been freezed by the respondent-Bank. Counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation and the banking authorities as well, as and when required. 3. Counsel for the respondent-State opposes the prayer and submits that complaints were received about the cyber crime committed and amount deposited in the bank account of the petitioner and that is why, a decision has been taken for freezing the account of the petitioner, hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Looking to the fact that no material has been placed on record to show that the petitioner or his account is involved in any sort of cyber crime but looking to the fact that certain amount was deposited in the account of the petitioner and only on this count alone, his bank account has been freezed. 6. The instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing direction to the respondent Bank to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner bearing No.50100201399078 with the HDFC Bank, Sanganer Circle, Jaipur and the petitioner shall be allowed to operate the aforesaid account and make
(3 of 3) [CW-10326/2025] transactions. However, the respondents are directed to freeze the disputed amount only, which is alleged to be involved in the fraudulent transactions. 7. It is made clear that the petitioner will co-operate with the bank authorities and investigating agency and will appear before them as and when required. 8. This Court also observes that the petitioner shall not close or discontinue the aforesaid account till the investigating agency and banking authorities permit him to do so. 9. It is further ordered that after investigation, if the involvement of the petitioner is found in any illegal transactions, he shall be liable to pay the amount involved in the aforesaid illegal transactions and will face inquiry/investigation in accordance with law. 10.
It is further ordered that the respondent-Bank shall be at liberty to transfer the amount involved in the illegal transaction to the original account from which it was credited to the petitioner's account. 11. The stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/57