Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1701 (CAL)

SURAKSHA DIAGNOSTIC LIMITED AND ANR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/2425/2026 · 2026-03-19

Krishna Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

S/L 3 19.03.2026 Court. No. 25 suvayan WPA 2425 of 2026 Suraksha Diagnostic Limited & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Ms. Antara Ganguli Ms. Bipasha Kanjilal …for the petitioners. Mr. Joydip Banerjee Mr. Raja Ram Banerjee …for the State. Mr. Debabrata Das Mr. A. Sarkar Mr. Pratik Acharjee …for the respondent no. 4. Ms. Sweta Mukherjee Ms. Sharmistha Dutta …for HDFC Bank. 1. The matter is listed today under the heading “To Be Mentioned” on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that she has received the instruction from the petitioners that the Bank has already defreezed the account and as such the petitioners are not intending to proceed with the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the Bank submits that the Bank had freezed the account of the petitioners as per instructions of authorities. Now the Bank has received instruction to defreeze the account and accordingly it was defreezed. 4. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and the written instruction dated March 14, 2026, WPA 2425 of 2026 is dismissed as withdrawn. 2 5. The written instruction dated March 14, 2026 be kept with the record. 6. The interim order, if any, stands vacated. (Krishna Rao, J.)