- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 10245 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: NITIN SONI S/O ASHOK KUMAR SONI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT HOUSE NUMBER 1729/2 MADAI NEW SHOBHAPUR BHARPURA, JABALPUR MADHYA PRADESH 582009 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. RANGANATH M A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE JAYANAGAR POLICE STATION 156/1 6TH MAIN ROAD 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BENGALURU 560001 2. BANK OF BARODA REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER 2689-2690 POLIPATHAR NARMADA ROAD, ADARSH NAGAR JABALPUR, MADHYA PRADESH 482008 &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA FOR R1) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO REMOVE LIEN AND FURTHER DEFREEZE THE ACCOUNT OF THE PETITIONER AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER HEREIN TO USE AND OPERATE THE BEARING THE A/C NO. 37150100008401, IFSC BARBOADAJAB MAINTAINED IN BANK OF BARODA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with since this Court is of the view that the disputed amount quantified by the Investigating Agency has to be lien marked. Since this Court is resolved to lien mark, issuance of notice to respondent No.2 may not arise for consideration. 2. The petitioner has presented the instant writ petition calling in question the action of respondent No.23 Bank in debit freezing his bank account, which according to him is arbitrary, disproportionate and has the effect of paralyzing his day-to-day business operations. The - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 petitioner asserts that he is engaged in the business of sale of electronic appliances and is running a registered establishment under the name and style of <Guru Ji Mobile and Electronics.= It is his specific case that an amount of ¹6,00,000/- came to be credited to his account through RTGS by one individual by name Harsha. The petitioner contends that at the time of such credit, he bonafidely believed that the amount represented consideration received in the ordinary course of his business transactions from a customer. However, it is stated that respondent No.23Bank, acting upon a communication received from the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, has proceeded to debit freeze the petitioner9s account without affording any prior notice or opportunity. 3. The petitioner, with a view to demonstrate his bona fides, has fairly submitted before this Court that the amount of ¹6,00,000/- credited to his account was not in fact relatable to any business transaction and that such credit was not solicited by him. He would further submit - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 that he had no dominion or control over the said amount in the sense of claiming any lawful entitlement thereto. In order to further allay any apprehension on the part of the Investigating Agency, the petitioner has expressed his readiness and willingness to deposit the said amount before the jurisdictional Magistrate or to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. 4. Be that as it may, this Court is of the considered view that the action of the Bank in freezing the entire account, notwithstanding the fact that the disputed transaction is confined to a quantified sum of ¹6,00,000/-, is disproportionate and results in undue hardship to the petitioner, who is admittedly carrying on business activities through the said account. At the same time, the interest of the Investigating Agency also requires to be safeguarded so as to ensure that the alleged proceeds of the suspicious transaction are secured during the course of investigation. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 respondent3Bank is directed to retain a lien to the extent of the disputed amount, thereby balancing the competing interests of investigation and the petitioner9s right to carry on business. 5. In light of the aforesaid discussion and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby allowed in part. (ii) Respondent No.23Bank is directed to forthwith defreeze the petitioner9s bank account, subject to marking of lien to the extent of ¹6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs only), which shall remain under lien pending completion of investigation or until further orders by the competent Court. (iii) The petitioner shall be at liberty to operate the bank account in respect of the amounts exceeding ¹6,00,000/- without any - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20257 WP No. 10245 of 2026 restriction and to carry on his business transactions in accordance with law. (iv) The petitioner shall extend full cooperation to the Investigating Agency and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon, and furnish all such information, documents or clarification as may be required in the course of investigation. (v) It is made clear that the lien amount of ¹6,00,000/- shall be subject to further orders that may be passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate or competent Court seized of the matter. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10