Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11291 (RAJ)

ASHIK KURASHI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/7279/2026 · 2026-08-10

Kuldeep Mathur

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:38222] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7279/2026 CNR: RJHC010814792026 | URN: CRLMP / 12589U / 2026 Ashik Kurashi S/o Mainu Deen, Aged About 27 Years, Khatu Khurd, Po- Choti Khatu, Nagaur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. State Bank Of India, Through Its Branch Manager Choti Khatu Nagaur 3. The Deputy Inspector General, Cyber Crime Police Headquarter Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:- “I. Issue an appropriate direction to the Respondents to de- freeze the Petitioner's saving account bearing no. 41244925808 (IFS Code. SBIN0012899), of State Bank of India forthwith, after putting disputed amount on hold. II. By an appropriate order or direction, the bank account of the petitioner was put on freeze may kindly be quashed and set aside. III. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this criminal misc. petition with a direction to the State Bank Of India (Respondent No.2) to keep the disputed amount (the amount which was transferred illegally in the bank account of the [2026:RJ-JP:38222] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-7279/2026] petitioner) frozen and allow the petitioner to make transactions from his bank account from the remaining balance. 3. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent – Bank has not received the information regarding the exact figure of the disputed amount, which the Investigating Officer/Police alleges to be receipt(s) of the offence, the bank shall send a communication to the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, to indicate the amount to be earmarked for lien, while endorsing a copy of the instant order. 4. Upon receipt of such communication/letter, the concerned Investigating Officer/Police shall be under an obligation to apprise the respondent - Bank about the amount to be kept in lien, within a period of seven days of receiving the communication from the respondent - Bank. The respondent – bank shall thereafter do the needful as directed herein above. 5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, then it shall be duty bound to act in accordance with the instant order. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the instant criminal misc. petition is disposed of. 7. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 243/Sonia