Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010049972026 2026:GAU-AS:5061 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1535/2026 HAJRAT JANNATIN NAYEM W/O- ADIL HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHOTA RUPAHI, HERAPATTY, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782002 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANR THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, RAISINA HILLS, DELHI- 110001 2:INDIAN BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER HAIBARGAON NAGAON BRANCH ASSAM- 78200 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. NK Alom Advocate for the respondent(s): Ms. S Yasmin for respondent No.2 Date on which Judgment is reserved : NA Page No.# 2/6 Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 06.04.2026 Whether the Pronouncement is of the : NA Operative Part of the Judgment Whether the Full Judgment has been : Yes Pronounced JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. NK Alom, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S Yasmin, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 i.e. the Indian Bank; Mr. K Gogoi, the learned CGC is present on behalf of the Union of India. 2. The petitioner is a home-maker and occasionally assists in her husband’s grocery shop business. The petitioner maintains a savings Bank Account bearing A/C No.7337265965 with the respondent No.2 Indian Bank, Haibargaon, Nagaon Branch, Assam. 3. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that the petitioner had a credit of Rs.32,933.41/- as on 17.02.2026. However, the petitioner while trying to access the aforesaid bank account was not allowed to carry out transactions both online and offline. On enquiry, the petitioner was informed that her aforesaid account was freezed on account of a complaint received under the Page No.# 3/6 National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, wherein a transaction of Rs.10,000/- was credited to the petitioner’s account and that an amount of Rs.2000/- was shown as disputed. 4. The petitioner made various verbal requests for unfreezing her account, but the respondent Bank did not take any action till date. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 5. Mr. NK Alom, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is running a legal business and there is no fraudulent transaction of any kind related to the aforesaid bank account. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the action has been taken without giving any prior notice to the petitioner, which has caused immense prejudice to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the transaction in question involves too meager amount of Rs.2000/- which appears to be a part of a fraudulent transaction involving the aforesaid saving account of the petitioner. 6. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in similarly situated matters, there has been direction for keeping in lien the disputed amount and allowing the incumbents to run their respective bank accounts. 7. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel has relied upon Page No.# 4/6 the following case laws: i) WP No. 25631/2024 (Mohammed Saifullah Vs. Reserve Bank of India & Ors.) [The High Court of Judicature at Madras]; ii) WP(C)/17905/2024 & CM Appl./2640/2025 (Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt. Ltd.Vs. Union of India Anr.) [The High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] & iii) Crl. Writ Pettition No. 321/2025 (Mr. Kartik Yogeswar Chatur Vs. Union of India & Ors.) [The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur]. 8. In the case of Mohammed Saifullah (supra), the Hon’ble Madras High Court had observed that under the guise of investigation, order of freezing of the entire account without quantifying amount or period cannot be passed as the same would be in violation of the fundamental rights. 9. In the case of Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has made an observation that a balance was required to be struck regarding the rights of a complainant vis-a-vis the rights of an innocent and unwary account holder who is made to suffer unwarranted hardships due to blanket freezing of bank account. 10. In the case of Mr. Kartik Yogeswar Chatur (supra), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was dealing with the aspect of the provisions of Section 106 of the BNSS vis-a-vis the order of attachment / freezing Page No.# 5/6 of a bank account. 11. Ms. S Yasmin, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 Bank has submitted that the action taken is strictly in accordance with law and as per the direction of the respondent authorities. She has submitted that at this stage it is not known about the magnitude of the fraudulent transactions in which, the aforesaid account of the petitioner may be involved and the amount quantified at this stage may not be the final amount. She has also submitted that in the event this Court grants any relief to the petitioner, some kind of condition be imposed in public interest. 12. After consideration of the rival submissions, it transpires that the impugned action for freezing of the bank account of the petitioner has been done on a complaint received by the respondent No.2 under the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. 13. This Court has heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and has also given an anxious consideration of the respective submissions. 14. This Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if the petitioner is allowed to operate the aforesaid savings account in question with certain conditions. This Court is also of the view that in a given case, a balance is required to be struck between the interest of the investigation on cyber fraud which is creating a menace and the Page No.# 6/6 interest of a bona fide and innocent account holder. 15. This Court, accordingly observes that while the petitioner should be allowed to operate the aforesaid savings account, but the amount of Rs.2000/- be kept in lien which the petitioner also admits that she has no knowledge how the said amount was credited to her account. 16. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (a). The savings account of the petitioner bearing Account bearing A/C No.7337265965 with the respondent No.2 Indian Bank, Haibargaon, Nagaon Branch, Assam is directed to be defreezed forthwith. (b). The respondent No.2 shall keep a lien on the amount of Rs.2000/- respectively till further directions are not issued by the respondent authorities. (c). There shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant