- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 7314 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. MOHD SHAHARYAR SAHID ANSARI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS NO.4489, OLD WARD NO.2-2 NEW WARD NO.3, BHASKAR NAGAR ROAD BUWAPADA, NEAR SANDIP KIRANA STORE OPP MANDAKINI BHOR VIDYALAY AMBERNATH WEST, AMBERNATH THANE, MAHARASHTRA-421505 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANISH JOSE ANTONY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/ INVESTIGATION OFFICER SOUTH CEN CRIME POLICE STATION DCP SOUTH DIVISION BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560070. 3. SARASWAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD GROUND FLOOR, CHANDRAMA SUYODAYA COOP HSG SOC LTD PLOT NO 24 Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 AMBERNATH (E) THANE-421501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE LIEN MARKING OF THE PETITIONER'S ACCOUNT NUMBER BEARING 001005012538 MAINTAINED WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO AN EXTENT OF RS.18,000/- BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURES CONTAINED UNDER SECTION 107 OF BNSS, 2023 IS ARBITRARY AND IS IN VIOLATION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 19 (1) (g) AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed calling in question the action of respondent No.2 in directing respondent No.3–Bank to mark lien on the petitioner’s bank account bearing No.001005012538 to the extent of ₹18,000/- per month by invoking powers under Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 “BNSS, 2023”). The petitioner contends that the said lien marking has been effected without authority of law. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition, would vehemently contend that respondent No.3–Bank, acting upon the communication issued by respondent No.2, has marked lien on the petitioner’s account to the extent of ₹18,000/- without adherence to the procedure contemplated under law. He would submit that the action is taken without obtaining permission of the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate and without reporting the same to the Magistrate, which is contrary to Section 107 of BNSS, 2023. He would further contend that the impugned action amounts to an arbitrary interference with the petitioner’s right to carry on trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and also infringes the constitutional protection guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 3. Placing reliance on Section 107 of BNSS, 2023, learned counsel would submit that though the provision enables a police officer conducting investigation to secure property which is suspected to be derived or obtained from criminal activity, such action is subject to compliance with the procedure prescribed therein, including seeking appropriate orders from the jurisdictional Magistrate. In support of his submission, he places reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in Headstar Global (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala1. 4. Per-contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the petitioner has not been co-operating with the investigation. He would point out that a criminal case has been registered alleging fraud to the tune of ₹57,00,000/- and in that background, the action taken by the Investigating Officer in securing the lien over the petitioner’s account is justified. He therefore 1 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 3546 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 contends that no interference is warranted at the hands of this Court. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents, and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court has bestowed its anxious consideration to the rival submissions. Though this Court is not inclined to accede to the primary relief sought by the petitioner for quashing the action of respondent No.2 in directing lien marking on the petitioner’s bank account, the circumstances of the present case nevertheless warrant a limited modification in the manner in which the lien operates. 6. It is borne out from the records that respondent No.2, while conducting investigation, has issued a police notice invoking powers under Sections 91 and 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, calling upon respondent No.3– Bank to mark a lien over the petitioner’s account to the extent of ₹18,000/-. While the investigating agency is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 empowered to secure suspected proceeds or ensure availability of funds during the course of investigation, the exercise of such power cannot result in a complete or unreasonable restriction on the petitioner’s ability to operate his bank account, particularly when the amount indicated for lien marking is specifically quantified. 7. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the lien marking shall operate only to the extent of ₹18,000/- in the petitioner’s account. Consequently, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the bank account for any amount in excess of the said sum. At the same time, having regard to the pendency of the investigation and the apprehension expressed by the State, the petitioner shall ensure that a minimum balance of ₹25,000/- is maintained in the said account until the investigation is completed or until further orders are passed by the competent authority. 8. The apprehension expressed by the State that the petitioner is not co-operating with the investigation is not - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 supported by any material placed before this Court. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has made a statement before this Court that the petitioner is willing to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating officer whenever summoned. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner’s name does not presently figure in the First Information Report. In view of the statement made and recorded, the petitioner is directed to extend full cooperation to the investigating agency whenever his presence is required in connection with the ongoing investigation. 9. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed in part. (ii) The action of respondent No.2 in directing respondent No.3–Bank to mark lien on the petitioner’s account bearing - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13547 WP No. 7314 of 2026 No.001005012538 to the extent of ₹18,000/- is upheld and shall continue to remain in force. (iii) However, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the said bank account for any amount in excess of ₹18,000/- and respondent No.3–Bank shall not impose any restriction on the operation of the account beyond the said lien amount, pending completion of the investigation by the Investigating Officer. (iv) The petitioner shall extend full co-operation to the Investigating Officer and shall appear and furnish such information or documents as may be required in the course of investigation, if notice or summons is issued to him. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28