[2026:RJ-JP:3002] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1224/2026 M. K. Dyeing, Having Its Office At 999, Dudu House, Mohalla Bisaitiyan, Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302003 Through Its Proprietor Mohammed Kasif S/o Abdul Aziz. ----Petitioner Versus 1. IndusInd Bank, Through Its Deputy Branch Manager, Address- Ground And First Floor, Plot No 43, 44, 45 46, Crafts Palace, Golimar Gardens Scheme, Near Hotel Holiday Inn, Amer Road, Jaipur-302002, Rajasthan. 2. Police Inspector (P.I.), Delhi Special Cell (Sb) Police Station, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi, Delhi, India-110003. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Harshita Singhal for Mr. Param Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Neha Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/01/2026 1. Ms. Neha Sharma, Advocate appears for the Respondent No.1 and accepts notice on their behalf. Service is deemed to be complete. 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter was heard on merits. 3. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that yours Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition by calling the entire record and after perusal of the same :- (i) Issue appropriate order or direction commanding the Respondent Bank to immediately unfreeze the current account of the Petitioner bearing Account No. 201001310116, held with the IFSC code INDB0000933 belongs to the Indusind Bank Ltd., Ground & First Floor, Plot No. 43, 44, 45 & 46, Crafts Palace, Golimar Gardens Scheme, near Hotel Holiday Inn, Amer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302002. (ii) Declare that the action of the Respondent Bank is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution of India. (iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which is deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances by this Hon’ble Court may also be passed in favour of the petitioner’s committee.” [2026:RJ-JP:3002] (2 of 3) [CW-1224/2026] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never misused his bank account for the purpose of illegal transactions and has not committed any cyber crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the Investigating Agencies and will appear before the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies as and when called upon. He therefore prays that the disputed amount, which has been received in the petitioner's account, may be frozen, but that the amount other than the disputed amount may kindly be allowed to be withdrawn. He further prays that the petitioner may be allowed to operate his bank account for the transaction of money. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank, upon instructions submits that the bank account of the petitioner has been frozen in pursuance of the Notice received from respondent No.2- Police Inspector (P.I.), Delhi Special Cell (Sb) Police Station, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi, Delhi, India. Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank also submits that, as per information received, the disputed amount is around Rs.50,000/- and further submits that the petitioner may be directed not to discontinue the bank account until the investigation is completed or the criminal case is decided. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent-Bank. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the submissions so made, this Court is of the considered view that merely because certain amount has been transferred to the petitioner's bank account in spite of the fact that the petitioner is [2026:RJ-JP:3002] (3 of 3) [CW-1224/2026] not involved in fraudulent transaction/illegal activity/or a cyber crime, the act of freezing of the entire bank account and imposing complete restriction on transactions is seriously prejudiced to the rights of the petitioner, at the most the bank can keep lien on the amount to the extent it relates to the receipt(s) of offense/disputed amount/amount credited. However, the respondent-Bank should allow the petitioner to operate their bank account over and above such amount in accordance with the law. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Bank to de-freeze the bank account No.201001310116 with IndusInd Bank, of the petitioner, and he may be allowed to operate transactions in his bank account, while freezing only the amount of Rs.50,000/-, which is allegedly involved in the alleged fraudulent transaction. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner will co-operate with the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies and will appear before them as and when required. It is also ordered that the petitioner shall not close or discontinue his bank account till the Investigating Agencies and Bank Authorities permit the petitioner to do so. It is further ordered that, after the investigation, if the petitioner is found to be involved in any illegal transaction, he shall be liable to pay the amount involved in the illegal transaction and will face the enquiry/investigation as per law. 9. All other pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-40