Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269462025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/34/2026 SHORIFUL ISLAM S/O- NOZMUL HOQUE, R/O- VILLAGE - CHATOUDMARI, P.O- JALESWAR, P.S- LAKHIPUR, DISTRICT - GOALPARA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UCO BANK AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY IS CHAIRMAN, 10, B.T.M. SARANI, WEST BENGAL, KOLKATA-700001. 2:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER SURVEILLANCE AND INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT UCO BANK HEAD OFFICE 10 BTM SARANI KOLKATA- 700001. 3:THE BRANCH MANAGER UCO BANK JALESWAR BRANCH PIN - 783132 DISTRICT-GOALPARA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. B N GOGOI, S ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 28.01.2026 Heard Dr. BN Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, UCO Bank for the respondents no. 1 to 3. The petitioner is aggrieved that by virtue of the instructions issued by the respondent No.3 his Savings Account No.12020110055120 in UCO Bank, Jaleswar Branch has been freezed/blocked without giving any prior notice or information of the petitioner. It is submitted that as per information a sum of Rs.252/- was transferred to his Savings Account No.12020110055120 in UCO Bank, Jaleswar Branch. The learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the bank statement enclosed to the writ petition submits that no such amount has been transferred to the account of the writ petitioner. Rather, this account has been used by the petitioner to run his business and because of the account being freezed, he is facing financial hardship. In so far as the Bank authorities are concerned, the transaction amount as per information of the Bank is only Rs. 252/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that for a sum of Rs. 252/- his entire bank account ought to have been freezed and it should be permitted to operate the his bank account. Learned Standing Counsel for the bank also submits that as per their enquiry no such transaction has been found relating to the bank account of the writ petitioner save and except Rs. 252/-. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the bank should be allowed to keep the lien over Rs. 500/- and after that the account should be Page No.# 3/3 permitted to be used. It is made clear that the amount of Rs. 500/- shall not be permitted to be withdrawn from the bank account. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant