[2026:RJ-JP:3043] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18719/2025 M/s Kashmir Fruit Company, Through Its Proprietor Shri Bhagchand Chandani S/o Shri Tikam Chand, Age 47 Years Address- Block C, Shop No. 12, Fruit And Vegetable Ground, Vijaynagar, District Ajmer, Rajasthan 305624 ----Petitioner Versus 1. HDFC Bank, Vijaynagar, Dist. Ajmer Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Manager/authorized Officer. Address- Mill Road, Vijainagar, Ajmer (Raj.)- 305624 2. Police Station Cyber Crimes, District Rachakonda (Telangana) Through Its Station House Officer, Address Krishna Nagar, Road No. 2 Saroornagar Road No. 2, Krishna Nagar, Sai Function Hall, Lane, Sri Venkateshwara Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana 500074 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shravan Kr. Lahoti (through V.C.) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naman Yadav HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/01/2026 1. When the matter was called up, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 1-bank informed to this Court that the respondent-bank sent an e-mail to respondent No. 2 to inquire about the disputed amount pursuant to the order dated 10.01.2026. But, despite sending the said e-mail, till date no exact amount has been intimated by Respondent No. 2. He further submits that as per online portal and information available under the bank, the whole of the disputed amount is reflected as Rs.1,50,000/-. [2026:RJ-JP:3043] (2 of 4) [CW-18719/2025] 2. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without entering into any debate with regard to the disputed amount, he has no objection if there is a lien kept on the said amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, and he may be permitted to use the remaining amount lying in the bank. 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, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the writ filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction :- I. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to 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. II. The Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the respondent Bank to forthwith de-freeze the aforementioned bank account (as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the petition) of the petitioner, and/or; III. Any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, which the Hon'ble Court deems appropriate in the factual matrix of the instant case, may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner." 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, 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. [2026:RJ-JP:3043] (3 of 4) [CW-18719/2025] 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 Police Station Cyber Crimes, District Rachakonda (Telangana). Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank also submits that, as submitted above, the whole of the disputed amount is reflected as Rs.1,50,000/- on the respondent-Bank's portal, 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 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.50200015723756 with HDFC Bank, of the petitioner, and he may be allowed to operate transactions in his bank account, while [2026:RJ-JP:3043] (4 of 4) [CW-18719/2025] freezing only the amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, 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-160s