1 2025:CGHC:60896-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 633 of 2025 Nikhil Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Khilawan Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Patpar, Police Station Bhatapara Rural, Disrict Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Director General Of Police Police Headquarters, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. Additional Director General Of Police Police Headquarters, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4. Superintendent Of Police (Sp) Balodabazar District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 5. Bank Of Baroda Through Its Branch Manager, Bhatapara Branch, I F S C Code Barb0bhatap, Distt. Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain Rizvi, Advocate. For Respondents/State :Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Ankit Singhal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.12.16 14:40:21 +0530 2 Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 15.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashnak Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate general, appearing for the respondents/State and Mr. Ankit Singhal, Counsel for respondent No. 5. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ/Direction, modifying the freezing order to apply only to the disputed amount of 25,000/-, and further ₹ directing Respondent No. 3, 4 & 5 to immediately lift the hold/freeze on the Petitioner's Bank of Baroda Current Account for the remaining balance, in line with the principle of proportionality upheld in Kartik Yogeshwar Chatur Vs. Union of India (2025:BHC- NAG:12610-DB) and V-Mart Retail Limited vs. The Nodal Cyber Cell Officer of Tamil Nadu (W.P.Crl.No.474 of 2025). 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3&4 to conclude the investigation into the matter pertaining to the Petitioner's account within a stipulated and reasonable period. 3 10.3 Any other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted to the Petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, a young entrepreneur operating under the name and style “Nikhil Common Service Center,” seeks urgent judicial intervention to unfreeze his current account (Account No. 31350200002049) maintained with Respondent No. 5, Bank of Baroda, Bhatapara Branch. The account, vital for his business operations and livelihood, was frozen on 02.05.2025 in connection with an alleged cyber fraud originating from Jaipur, Rajasthan, and Surajpur, C.G. The petitioner has fully cooperated with the investigation, submitting a detailed application to Respondent No. 4/SP on 06.05.2025. Despite such cooperation and the absence of any evidence implicating him in the alleged fraud, the account remains frozen, causing significant financial hardship and infringing upon his fundamental right to carry on trade and earn a livelihood. The petitioner therefore seeks modification of the freezing order and a direction to conclude the investigation at the earliest. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the petition and submits that the matter pertains to an ongoing cyber fraud investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed W.P.C. No. 4639 of 2025 seeking similar relief, which was dismissed by a co-ordinate bench. Additionally, the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available 4 under the law to approach the appropriate Magistrate for redressal. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the material available on record. 6. In view of the submissions, it is apparent that the petitioner’s grievance pertains to an ongoing investigation into alleged cyber fraud. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.C. No. 4639 of 2025 seeking similar relief, which was dismissed by a co-ordinate bench, indicating that the petitioner has already availed judicial remedy in respect of the same cause of action. Furthermore, the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available under the criminal law to approach the appropriate Magistrate for redressal of his grievance. Considering these aspects, this petition does not warrant interference with the ongoing investigation or the banking restrictions imposed in connection therewith. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti