Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29138 (RAJ)

ANNU SHARMA D/O SHRI SITARAM SHARMA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/5600/2025 · 2025-09-26

Sudesh Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:39941] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5600/2025 Annu Sharma D/o Shri Sitaram Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village Dasvi, Post Galod, Tehsil Nadaun, Dasvi Hameerpur, Himachal Pradesh 177026, Aaadhar No. 9103 4820 3262. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P 2. Chhavi Adhlaka D/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Adhlaka, Present Address Cyber Star, A.B. 367, Nirman Nagar, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandra Shekhar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP Mr. Abhinav Sharma for the complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 26/09/2025 1. By way of filing instant miscellaneous petition, a prayer has been made to defreeze Bank Account No. 150000000198 of IndusInd Bank, Branch Panchkula, Haryana of petitioner and to set aside the order dated 03.04.2025, passed by Additional Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I and order dated 10.07.2025, passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, dismissing revision petition thereagainst. 2. It appears that petitioner’s Bank Account was seized during the course of investigation in FIR No.510/2022, registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar, Jaipur, for offences under Sections [2025:RJ-JP:39941] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-5600/2025] 420, 406 & 120-B of IPC and since, in Bank Account of petitioner, an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- came to be deposited on 22.12.2022 through Cyber Star Company and such amount was alleged by complainant to have been siphoned off. 3. It has been stated that amount in question has been paid to the complainant and the counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2-complainant has no objection to defreeze the Bank Account of petitioner. 4. In view of above, purpose to seize the Bank Account of petitioner stands satisfied and the amount in question i.e. Rs.2,50,000/-, which was allegedly transferred in the Bank Account of petitioner has already been refunded to the complainant, hence, this Court deems it just and proper to defreeze the Bank Account of petitioner. 5. As a result, the petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated 03.04.2025 & 10.07.2025 are set aside. 6. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J pcg/17