Page No.# 1/7 GAHC030000762026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/2/2026 Sh Lalsawirema S/o Zozinga (L), R/o Venglai, Kolasib, Mizoram Pin-796081 VERSUS HDFC Bank Ltd. and 4 Ors. HDFC House Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Perel Mumbai, Maharastra, Pin-400013 R/b its Branch Manager HDFC Bank, Kolasib Branch, Mizoram 2:HDFC Bank Lt. Kolasib Branch 3:State of Tamil Nadu 4:R.V.Gowtham DSP 5:D.K.Chandrasekha Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Lalchhanhima Renthlei Advocate for the Respondent : Ms K.Lalnunpuii Linked Case : W.P.(Crl.)/9/2025 Sh. Lalsawirema S/o Zozinga (L) R/o Venglai Kolasib Page No.# 2/7 Mizoram - 796 081 VERSUS HDFC Bank Ltd. and 4 Ors. HDFC House Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Perel Mumbai Maharashtra - 400 013 R/b its Branch Manager HDFC Bank Kolasib Branch Mizoram 2:HDFC Bank Ltd. Kolasib Branch Mizoram R/b the Branch Manager namely Walid Hasan as Authorized Signatory of the Branch Venglai Opposite Sumo Stand Kolasib - 796 081 Mizoram 3:State of Tamil Nadu R/b Secretary Home Department Chennai - 600 009 4:Sh. R.V. Gowtham DSP State Cyber Crime Investigation Center Cyber Crime Wing HQ Ashok Nagar Chennai - 600 083 Tamil Nadu India 5:Sh. D.K. Chansdrasekhar S/o S. Kulanthaisamy 35 R/o Kumarajapuram (East) Karur - 639 002 Tamil Nadu India Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalthangmawia Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. Monjyoti Smith for R1 & R2 Page No.# 3/7 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA O R D E R 25.08. 2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 28.01.2026, passed in CMA No.14/2025, arising out of Civil Suit No. 2/2025 before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib. 3. The case projected before the Court on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner had maintained an account with HDFC Bank, Kolasib Branch and the said account was freezed by the bank authorities on the basis of a communication dated 13th of February, 2025, issued by the Cyber Crime Wing, Headquarters, Tamil Nadu Police, requesting the bank authorities to freeze the account. The said communication was issued on the basis of a complaint received by the Cyber Crime Wing, Headquarters of the Tamil Nadu Police. This was followed by an order dated 3rd of March, 2025, issued by the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai passed in Crl.M.P. No. 1967/2025, whereby the account of the petitioner, bearing Account No. 50100611946737, maintained in the HDFC Bank, Kolasib Branch and containing an amount of Rs. 27,90,009.00/- was directed to be transmitted to the account maintained by the Page No.# 4/7 Private Respondent No. 5, who had initially lodged a complaint before the Cyber Crime Wing of the Tamil Nadu Police. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petitioner filed WP(Crl.)/9/2025, praying for quashing of the said order passed by the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai. An interim order was issued by the Court, staying the operation of the order passed in the said Criminal Petition. Being aggrieved by the ex parte interim order, the Respondent No. 5, who was arrayed as Private Respondent No. 5 in the writ petition, preferred the appeal in Writ Appeal No. 1/2026. The said appeal came to be allowed by Judgment and Order dated 20.05.2026, whereby the Appellate Court interfered and set aside the interim order dated 13.01.2026 passed in WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025. It was further directed that, insofar as the writ petitioner sought to assail the judicial order dated 03.03.2025, passed by the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, in the criminal proceeding arising within the State of Tamil Nadu, the same was not constitutional, maintainable before the Gauhati High Court. It was also held that since the writ petition was pending before the learned Single Judge, a formal order would be required to be passed by the learned Single Judge closing the said writ petition. In essence, the Division Bench held that the writ petition, being WP(Crl.)/9/2025, insofar as it sought quashing of order dated 03.03.2025, passed by the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai was not maintainable. However, since the writ petition was still pending, no order was passed dismissing the writ petition; rather the matter was remanded to the learned Single Judge for passing appropriate orders. 4. The present revision petition was filed on 12th February, 2026, challenging the order dated 28.01.2026, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib. Page No.# 5/7 According to the petitioner, the matter was heard by the Court. It is the submission of the petitioner herein that before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib, the petitioner sought permission to use his account and withdraw the amount available in the account to the credit of the present writ petitioner, which is not the disputed amount. However, instead of permitting the petitioner to use the said amount, the impugned order was passed wherein it was held that the application filed by the petitioner will have to await for the decision of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025. 5. The present revision petition was heard on 17.08.2026. It was submitted on behalf of the Private Respondent No. 5 that the said Writ Petition (Crl.) had been dismissed by the Division Bench vide order dated 20.05.2026, passed in Writ Appeal No. 1/2026. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court was inclined to dispose of the matter. However, subsequently from the case record available, it is seen that the Division Bench vide its judgment and order dated sos passed in W.A. No. soso did not dismiss the WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 as had been submitted on behalf of Respondent No. 5. Rather, the Division Bench had set aside the interim order and had allowed the writ appeal. The Division Bench had held that in view of the findings by the Division Bench, the writ petition will have to be closed by the learned Single Judge by passing appropriate orders. Further, it is also seen that in deference to the order passed by the Division Bench, vide judgment and order dated 20.05.2026, no orders were passed by the concerned Single Bench, closing or disposing of the writ petition, being WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 in terms of the judgment and order dated 20.05.2026 passed in Writ Appeal No. 1/2026. Consequently, the matter was fixed today for passing appropriate orders. Page No.# 6/7 6. Upon perusal of the pleadings available before this Court, it is seen that the WP(Crl.)/9/2025 was not dismissed by the Writ Appellate Court in Writ Appeal No. 1/2026 vide judgment and order dated 20.05.2026. Rather it had interfered with the interim order and relegated the matter back to the learned Single Judge for passing appropriate orders in view of its conclusions that the Writ Petition, being WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 was not maintainable, insofar as the challenge made therein was to the order dated 03.03.2026, passed by the XIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai in the State of Tamil Nadu. It was held that the Gauhati High Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to interfere with such an order. Today a copy of the order dated 04.06.2026 passed in WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 is placed in the Court records. From the said order, it is seen that the learned Single Judge by order dated 04.06.2026, passed in WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025, while referring to the judgment and order dated 20.05.2026 passed in Writ Appeal No. 1/2026 had dismissed the writ petition as not been maintainable. 7. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the issues raised in the present revision petition are essentially a challenge made in the order dated 28.01.2026, passed in CMA No. 14/2025, arising out of Civil Suit No. 2/2025, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib in the State of Mizoram. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite hearing the matter by the Court, instead of passing appropriate order permitting the petitioner to operate the account, at least to the extent of the funds which are not disputed by the opposite-party defendants, no such order was passed, and the matter was kept pending on the ground that WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 was pending before the Gauhati High Court and that the present application filed by Page No.# 7/7 the petitioner before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib will await for the decision of the Gauhati High Court in WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025. 8. Under such circumstances, in view of the discussions hereinabove, and since the writ petition being WP(Crl.) No. 9/2025 came to be dismissed in view of the findings arrived at Writ Appeal No. 1/2026 vide judgment and order dated 20.05.2026, there is no restraint upon the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kolasib to proceed for hearing the matter CMA No. 14/2025, arising out of Civil Suit No. 2/2025 and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 9. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Judge) shall take into consideration the grievances raised by the parties before passing appropriate orders as directed. 10. Let this exercise be completed within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 11. Accordingly, this revision petition stands disposed of in terms of the above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant