[2026:RJ-JP:15736] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5603/2026 Vikash Sharma S/o Shri Ravikant Sharma, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of 13, Ashok Nagar 2, Niwaru Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302012. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Home, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. IndusInd Bank, Through Branch Manager, Branch- Ground Floor, Shop No. G-3, And G-4, And Mezzanine Floor Ship No. S-3 And S-4, Plot O. C-1, Krishna Enclave-1, Khasra No. 54/1, Kalwar Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302012. 3. DIG, Cyber Crime, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sunita Meena for Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG Ms. Neha Sharma for Mr. Vineet Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI Order 15/04/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow this writ petition and be further pleased to: (i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order direction commanding the Respondent Bank to immediately unfreeze the Savings Bank Account bearing No. 159610177133 in Indusind Bank Kalwar Road, Jaipur branch and permit the petitioner to operate the same forthwith. [2026:RJ-JP:15736] (2 of 5) [CW-5603/2026] (ii) In the alternative, direct the Respondents to limit any restraint to a lien of bond equivalent to disputed amount, while allowing the petitioner to operate the account for its legitimate business purposes. (iii) Issue directions to the Respondents to refrain from indiscriminate full-account freezes in future cases involving intermediaries and to adopt less intrusive measures such as prior notices under Section 41A/102 of Cr.P.C. and proportional liens. (vi) Direct the Respondents to complete the investigation within a time-bound manner, so that petitioner is not subjected to indefinite hardship. (vii) Any other writ, order or direction that this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the interest of justice. (viii) Declare that the action of the respondent bank is arbitrary illegal, and violative of Article 14, 19(1) (g) and 300A of the constitution of India. (ix) Award cost of this Petition in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never misused the aforesaid bank account for the purpose of illegal transactions and has not committed any cyber crime and has no relation whatsoever to the alleged fraudulent transaction(s). 3. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Agencies and will appear before the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies as and when called upon. 4. Therefore, learned counsel prays that while the disputed amount which has been received in the petitioner's account may be frozen, the amount other than the disputed amount may kindly [2026:RJ-JP:15736] (3 of 5) [CW-5603/2026] be allowed to be withdrawn and the petitioner may be allowed to operate and carry out the banking transactions from the said bank account. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent – Bank submits that the bank account of the petitioner has been frozen strictly in compliance of financial cyber fraud complaint(s). 6. Learned counsel for the respondent – Bank 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. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent – State submits that reply to the writ petition has been filed and the disputed amount involved in the matter is Rs.555.34. The petitioner is the beneficiary of the amount involved in financial cyber fraud complaint(s) and the investigation is undergoing, no interference is called for at this stage. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent – Bank. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 10. In view of the submissions so made, this Court is of the considered view that merely because a certain amount has been transferred to the petitioner's bank account in an alleged fraudulent transaction, the act of freezing the entire bank account and imposing complete restriction on banking transactions at this stage will seriously prejudice the rights of the petitioner. At the most, the Bank can keep a lien on the amount to the extent it relates to the alleged fraudulent transaction(s) credited in the petitioner’s bank account. [2026:RJ-JP:15736] (4 of 5) [CW-5603/2026] 11. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i) The respondent – Bank shall de-freeze the bank account No. 159610177133 of the petitioner maintained at Indusind Bank Kalwar Road, Jaipur branch, positively within a period of three days from the date of submission of certified copy of this order and the petitioner may be allowed to operate and carry out banking transactions in the said bank account over and above the disputed amount, in accordance with law. However, the disputed amount i.e., Rs.555.34 which has been credited in the petitioner’s bank account in connection with the alleged fraudulent transaction(s) shall remain frozen; ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Bank Authorities and the Investigating Agencies and will appear before them, as and when required; iii) The petitioner shall not close or discontinue the bank account till the Investigating Agencies and Bank Authorities permit the petitioner to do so; iv) If the involvement of the petitioner is found in any illegal transaction(s), the petitioner shall be liable to pay amount involved in the aforesaid illegal transaction and will face inquiry/investigation as per law; and v) The petitioner shall ensure that all the compliances required for maintaining and operating his bank account with the respondent – Bank are duly complied with. vi) Needless to say, that this order has been passed only in the context of de-freezing of the bank account of the petitioner and in no manner is to be construed as any determination with [2026:RJ-JP:15736] (5 of 5) [CW-5603/2026] respect to the merits of the financial cyber fraud complaint under question. 12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (ANUROOP SINGHI),J DIPESH CHAYAL /53