S/L 10 25.08.2026 Court. No. 25 Sourav WPA 4934 of 2026 Asfia Khatun Vs. South Indian Bank & Ors. Mr. Suman Dey … for the petitioner. 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for a direction upon the respondent no. 1, South Indian Bank, Burdwan Branch to defreeze the account of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is maintaining his current account being Account No. 0774073000000293 with the respondent no. 1 Bank. On September 13, 2023 all of a sudden the Bank has freezed the account of the petitioner. When the petitioner came to know about the freezing of the account of the petitioner, the petitioner has contacted the respondent no. 1 and the respondent no. 1 informed the petitioner that the account of the petitioner has freezed on receipt of the report from Sarthana Police Station, Surat City, Gujarat. 3. It was further informed that as per the said report of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Gujarat that the disputed amount is Rs. 10,000/-. On receipt of the said information, the petitioner has visited the said Police Station of Gujarat and the police authorities have informed the petitioner that the police authorities have informed the Bank that the account of the petitioner may be allowed to operate by keeping Rs. 10,000/- which is the disputed amount in lien. But in spite of the request 2 made by the investigating agency also the Bank has not defreezed the account of the petitioner and for the last three years, the petitioner is not in a position to operate the bank account. 4. The petitioner has filed the affidavit-of-service wherein it is found that in the month of February and March, the notice has been served upon the respondent bank but none appears. Subsequently, when the petitioner has mentioned the matter in the month of July again the petitioner has served the notice upon the respondent authorities including the bank but instead of second service of notice, none appears on behalf of the Bank. 5. The petitioner has also relied upon the WhatsApp messages. When the petitioner has mentioned the matter yesterday before this Court and this Court allowed that the writ petition be listed today, the same was also informed to the respondent no. 1 through WhatsApp and the respondent no. 1 had the knowledge that the matter will be taken up today but in spite of the same, none appears on behalf of the respondents including the respondent Bank. 6. This Court finds that time and again the petitioner has served the notice upon the respondents but none appears on behalf of the respondents including the respondent Bank and thus, this Court has no other alternative but to take the writ application for hearing in absence of the respondent bank. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. This Court finds that the Bank has freezed the account of the petitioner on September 13, 2023 and since then the 3 petitioner is unable to operate the bank account. The petitioner has also approached the police authorities on the basis of which the bank has freezed the account of the petitioner and the police authorities have categorically informed the petitioner that the only disputed amount is Rs. 10,000/- and the police authorities have requested the bank to defreeze the account of the petitioner by keeping disputed amount of Rs. 10,000/- in lien but instead of the same, the bank has not defreezed the account of the petitioner. 9. Considering the above, this Court finds that the only disputed amount is Rs. 10,000/- but the Bank has freezed the total account of the petitioner for the last three years. Accordingly, the respondent no. 1, the Branch Manager, South Indian Bank, Burdwan Branch is directed to allow the petitioner to operate the bank account of the petitioner by keeping the disputed amount of Rs. 10,000/- in lien. 10. WPA 4934 of 2026 is disposed of. 11. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)