Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26128 (MAD)

AVINASH RAJ v. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MIINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

WP/12870/2025 · 2025-06-12

P Velmurugan

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.No.12870 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 12.06.2025 Coram: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN W.P.No.12870 of 2025 --- Avinashraj, S/o Bhaskar .. Petitioner Vs. 1. Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi-110 001. 2. Airtel Payments Bank Limited, Branch Office at: Chennai Branch, Rep. by its Branch Manager, 185, T.H.Road, Thiruvottiyur, Landmark: LMN Koil Corporation Bus Stop, Chennai-600 019. Head Office at: Rep. by its Branch Manager, Bharti Crescent 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, Phase-II, New Delhi-110 070. 3. Station House Officer, Utran Police Station, Rajput, Faliyu, Utran Gam, Surat, Gujarat-394 105. .. Respondents Page No. 1 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12870 of 2025 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to de-freeze the petitioner's Bank Account No.7010913308 maintained in the second respondent/Bank, within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court. For petitioner : Mr.Leeban Arivalagan For respondents: Mr.R.T.L.Chandar, Senior Panel Counsel, Central Govt. Standing Counsel for R-1 No appearance for R-2 R-3 - not ready in notice ORDER The petitioner has filed the present petition for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to de-freeze the petitioner's Bank Account No.7010913308 maintained in the second respondent-Bank, within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court. 2. This petition is filed as against the respondents, who are all not in the State of Tamil Nadu, except stating the Chennai address also in respect of the second respondent. The first respondent is at New Delhi. The address of the second respondent is also at New Delhi, but Chennai address is also given. The third respondent is at Gujarat. 3. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to give any direction at Page No. 2 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12870 of 2025 this stage, as the respondents 1 and 3 are outside the jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, this petition is dismissed. 12.06.2025 cs To 1. Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi-110 001. 2. Station House Officer, Utran Police Station, Rajput, Faliyu, Utran Gam, Surat, Gujarat-394 105. Page No. 3 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12870 of 2025 P.VELMURUGAN, J cs W.P.No.12870 of 2025 12.06.2025 Page No. 4 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis