[2025:RJ-JP:42705] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15920/2025 Sheru Saini, S/o Seetaram Saini, R/o Dhani-Khadali, Jhotwara, Niwaroo, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302012 ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur - 302005 2. The Commissioner Of Police, Nashik City, 2Q4J-4Hh, Gangapur Rd, Opposite K.t.h.m. College, Police Staff Colony, Nashik, Maharashtra 422002 3. Senior Police Inspector, Police Station Indiranagar, Nashik City, Xqfh-Rcp, Mumbai-Agra Road, Indira Nagar, Rajiv Nagar, Nashik, Maharashtra 4222009 4. Au Small Finance Bank, Branch Chomu, Rajasthan Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office Shop No, Basant Plaza, 1 To 3 And 13 To 15, Morija Rd, Near Krishi Mandi, Gurudham Colony, Chomu, Rajasthan 303702 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Kumar with Mr. Hemant Runthla For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dikshant Jain for Mr. Alok Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 17/10/2025 1. The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “1. issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the arbitrary, illegal, and mala fide debit freeze imposed on the bank account of the writ petitioner. 2. Direct respondent No. 2 and 3 to furnish the writ petitioner with a copy of the complaint/FIR and any relevant materials relied upon to justify [2025:RJ-JP:42705] (2 of 3) [CW-15920/2025] the excessive measure of freezing the entire account; and direct the respondent no. 4 to de- freeze the said bank account bearing account number.2111216431768401. 3. Direct respondent No. 2 and 3 to compensate the petitioner for the financial loss, market credibility loss and reputational damage caused due to the arbitrary freeze imposed by respondents without following due process by paying litigation costs. 4. Pass such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for both the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 21.07.2025 in the case of Dashrath Singh Rathore vs. HDFC: SBCWP No. 10387/2025. 2.By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondent-Bank for defreezing his current bank accounts No.50100287592876 and 177310100106055 in the HDFC Bank. 3.Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concerned whatsoever with any cyber crime committed by anyone, even then his entire accounts has been freezed. Counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation as and when required. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank opposes the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that on instructions from 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. 5.Considering the submissions made by counsel for the respective parties, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with directions to the respondent-Bank to defreeze the bank accounts of the petitioner bearing No.50100287592876 and 177310100106055 in the HDFC Bank. and he may be allowed to operate and make transactions from the said bank accounts. The respondents are further directed to freeze the disputed amount, which is allegedly involved in the fraudulent transaction. [2025:RJ-JP:42705] (3 of 3) [CW-15920/2025] 6.It is made clear that the petitioner will co-operate with Bank authorities and investigating agency and will appear before them as and when required. 7.This Court also observes that the petitioner shall not close or discontinue the aforesaid account till the investigating agency and Bank authorities permit him to do so. 8.It is further ordered that after investigation, if the involvement of the petitioner is found in any illegal transaction, he shall be liable to pay amount involved in the aforesaid illegal transaction and will face inquiry/investigation as per law. 9.It is further ordered that the respondent-Bank shall be at liberty to transfer the amount to the original account from which it was credited to petitioner’s account. 10. The stay application and all pending applications, if any,also stand disposed of. 3. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of in above terms mutatis mutandis. 4. Pending application(s), if any, also disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J ANIL SHARMA /54