Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12175 (GAU)

SRI MRINAL HAZARIKA v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS

WP(C)/2638/2026 · 2026-08-11

Manish Choudhury

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No. 1/3 GAHC010097472026 2026:GAU-AS:11407 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2638/2026 SRI MRINAL HAZARIKA S/O-SAILEN HAZARIKA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHURCHURI, P.O.- BARNARDDI, P.S.- BELSOR, DISTRICT- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN- 781303. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARY OFFICE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001 2:THE INDIAN CYBERCRIME COORDINATION CENTRE 14C 5TH FLOOR NDCC II BUILDING JAI SINGH ROAD NEW DELHI- 11000 3:THE CHAIRMAN HEAD OFFICE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA STATE BANK BHAVAN M.C. ROAD NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI MAHARASTRA PIN-400021 4:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER SURVEILLANCE AND INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE WEST GANDHI MAIDAN PATNA PIN- 800001 Page No. 2/3 5:THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA PALTANBAZAR BRANCH GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN 781001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BARMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., S SENGUPTA(R3,4,5),MR P GOGOI(R3,4,5),MR. W SHARMA(R3,4,5),MR. A K SAHEWALLA(R3,4,5) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 12.08.2026 Heard Mr. S. Barman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. W. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3, 4 & 5. 2. The writ petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition stating that Savings Bank Account no. 20174690585 he has been maintaining at Paltan Bazar Branch, Guwahati of the State Bank of India [SBI] was kept blocked since 21.10.2025 on the premise that an amount of Rs. 49,999/- was credited to the Savings Bank Account of the petitioner, which amount is suspected to be a fraudulent transaction and the amount is traceable to a complaint registered at the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal [NCRP]. The petitioner who is a Government employee, has contended that the respondent Bank authorities have kept the entire Savings Bank Account blocked and as a result, the petitioner is deprived from using any amount from his monthly salary, credited in the Savings Bank Account every month. 3. The respondent SBI authorities have submitted an affidavit-in-opposition through the Chief Manager, the State Bank of India [SBI], Paltan Bazar Branch, Guwahati [the respondent no. 5]. In the affidavit-in-opposition, it is averred that the Savings Bank Account of the petitioner has been marked hold/lien on account of five nos. of transactions which pertain to Page No. 3/3 internet banking related frauds and in that connection, complaints are lodged before the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal [NCRP]. The details of the five transactions are mentioned as under :- Acknowledgement no./ Hold Reason Disputed Amount [in Rs.] Account no. 3502260019075 49,999.00 20174690585 32712250105812 22,999.31 20174690585 32712250104417 705.00 20174690585 30505260051824 49,999.00 20174690585 31612250168162 705.00 20174690585 Total 1,24,407.31 4. The respondent SBI authorities have further mentioned that the petitioners’ Saving Bank Account is now fully operational, with a lien to the extent of Rs. 1,24,407.31, which amount is suspected to be involved in internet banking relating fraud cases. 5. From the above, it is found that the Savings Bank Account of the petitioner maintained at the Paltan Bazar Branch, Guwahati of the SBI [the respondent no. 5] is made operational keeping a lien over an amount of Rs. 1,24,407.31. Meaning thereby, the petitioner would be able to operate the Bank Account with a lien over an amount of Rs. 1,24,407.34. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with an observation that as soon as the issues related to the amount of Rs. 1,24,407.31, which amount is suspected to be involved in internet banking related banking frauds are resolved, the respondent Bank authorities will take appropriate decision regarding the lien. JUDGE Comparing Assistant