- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10444 OF 2025 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10511 OF 2025 IN CRL.P No. 10444/2025 BETWEEN: ZAKI AHMED KHAN S/O FIAZ AHMED KHAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF FZ TRADERS R/AT No.397, SYED WADI, CHANNAPATNA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATH B R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANDEPALYA POLICE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SYED SAMEER AHMED S/O SYED KALEEM AHMED AGED 38 YEARS, Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 R/AT VENSA ROYAL G-04, 37/7, SOMASUNDARAPALYA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE - 560 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 SRI HARIPRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 Cr.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 13.05.2024 PASSED IN CR.No.267/2023 OF BANDEPALYA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 420, 465, 504 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX ACMM, AT BANGALORE AND ETC., IN CRL.P No. 10511/2025 BETWEEN: ZAKI AHMED KHAN S/O FIAZ AHMED KHAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF FZ TRADERS R/AT No.387, SYED WADI CHANNAPATNA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATH B R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANDEPALYA POLICE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SYED SAMEER AHMED S/O SYED KALEEM AHMED - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 AGED 38 YEARS, R/AT VENSA ROYAL G-04, 37/7, SOMASUNDARAPALYA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 102. 3. MOHD. AZAR ZAHOOR KAWOOSA S/O ZAHOOR AHMED KAWOOSA AGED 41 YEARS, BOTA KADAL LA BAZAR SRINAGAR, JAMMU AND KASHMIR - 190 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 SRI HARIPRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.05.2024 PASSED IN CR.No.267/2023 OF BANDEPALYA P.S. WHICH HAS BEEN REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 420, 465, 504 OF IPC WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX ACMM AT BANGALORE AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER These petitions are filed by the account holder in ICICI Bank which is the subject matter of the crime registered in Cr.No.267/2023. The petitioner is assailing the order dated 13.05.2025 passed by the Magistrate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 while entertaining an application filed under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. filed by the defacto complainant. 2. Facts leading to the case are as under: The petitioner is the account holder of an ICICI Bank account bearing No. 141605011661. The said account came to be frozen pursuant to a request made by the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.267/2023. It is an admitted position that the petitioner is not arrayed as an accused in the said crime. 3. Aggrieved by the freezing of his account, the petitioner moved an application before the learned IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, seeking defreezing of the account on the ground that the continued freezing was causing serious prejudice to his right to operate his account. 4. While the petitioner’s application remained pending without adjudication, two other applications came to be filed one by respondent No.3 in the present petition - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 and another by respondent No.2 in the connected petition, Crl.P.No.10511/2025 seeking defreezing of the same account and transfer of the amount therein to their respective accounts. 5. By order dated 13.05.2025, the learned Magistrate allowed the application filed by respondent No.3 as well as the connected application, thereby directing the ICICI Bank account in question to be defrozen and the amounts transferred to the accounts of the second respondent/defacto complainant and the third respondent. A similar order was also passed in relation to Crime No.267/2023. These two orders are now under challenge in Crl.P.No.10444/2025 and Crl.P.No. 10511/2025. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on careful perusal of the impugned orders, this Court finds that the same are unsustainable in law. The process of freezing or defreezing a bank account that is the subject - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 matter of a criminal investigation must conform to the principles of natural justice. It is incumbent upon the Magistrate to afford an opportunity of hearing to the account holder and all concerned claimants before passing any order affecting the right to operate or receive funds from such an account. 7. In the present case, though the petitioner who is the admitted account holder had already filed an application for defreezing, the learned Magistrate kept the same in abeyance and, without deciding it, proceeded to entertain and allow the applications of the defacto complainant and respondent No.3. This was done without issuing notice to or hearing the petitioner, and without even adverting to his pending application. 8. The learned Magistrate has further observed in the impugned order that there was “no counter-claim”, which finding is clearly perverse in view of the petitioner’s pending application asserting his claim. The failure to - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 consider the petitioner’s application and the simultaneous grant of relief to the other applicants without hearing all concerned parties constitutes a serious procedural infirmity, rendering the impugned orders vulnerable to interference. 9. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned defreezing order dated 13.05.2024 passed by the learned IX ACMM, Bengaluru, in Crime No.267/2023, is liable to be set aside. The proper course is to direct that the applications filed by the petitioner (account holder), the defacto complainant, and respondent No.3 be clubbed together, heard simultaneously, and decided on merits, with reasons recorded as to who is entitled to the amount in Account No.141605011661, which is the subject matter of the proceedings in Crime No.267/2023. For the forgoing reasons this court passes following ; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 ORDER (i) Both Criminal Petitions, Crl.P.No.10444/2025 and Crl.P.No.10511/2025, are allowed. (ii) The order dated 13.05.2024 passed in Crime No.267/2023 by the learned IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is set aside. (iii) The learned Magistrate is directed to club and hear together the applications filed by the petitioner (account holder), the defacto complainant, and respondent No.3, and to decide the same afresh in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned. (iv) It is made clear that, until such applications are adjudicated and orders are passed in accordance with law, neither the petitioner nor the other parties shall be entitled to withdraw, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30807 CRL.P No. 10444 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 10511 of 2025 transfer, or otherwise claim the amount lying in Account No.141605011661. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE DKB