Page No. 1/4 GAHC010083532025 2026:GAU-AS:7325 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2113/2025 SRI PULAK BHUYAN S/O-UMESH BHUYAN,R/O-HOUSE NO.17,NO.1, UDYAN PATH,SAURAV NAGAR,BELTOLA,GUWAHATI,KAMRUP (M),ASSAM-781028 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT,2ND FLOOR,CM BLOCK, JANTA BHAWAN,DISPUR,GUWAHATI,ASSAM-781006 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ASSAM POLICE HEADQUARTERS ULUBARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M) ASSAM-781007 3:THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF TAMIL NADU HOME DEPARTMENT FORT ST GEORGE CHENNAI TAMIL NADU-600009 4:THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION TIRUPPUR CITY TAMIL NADU-641687 5:INDUSIND BANK REP. BY THE BRANCH MANAGER ANKIT TOWER Page No. 2/4 1ST FLOOR CHIWRAPATTY ROAD TINSUKI ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR R SENSUA,G KAUSHIK,R A LAHKAR,P KUNDU Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, A GOGOI (R-5),A K GOGOI(R-5) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 26.05.2026 Heard Mr. G. Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. A.K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition with a grievance that a Savings Bank Account no. 100047496263 maintained by him at Tinsukia Branch of IndusInd Bank [the respondent no. 5] was kept on hold due to a suspicious transaction dated 04.09.2024 in the form of credit of a sum of Rs. 62,603/-. On enquiry, the petitioner came to know that the freezing order was passed pursuant to a cyber complaint lodged by one Sri Sudarsan before the Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu. 3. Having learnt about the same, the petitioner informed the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu that a sum of Rs. 62,603/- had already been returned to the complainant, that is, Sri Sudarsan and requested the Inspector of Police to defreeze his bank account as the disputed amount had already been returned back. 4. Stating that despite the return of the credited amount the Bank Account of the petitioner was not defreezed, the petitioner has approached before this Court by the writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent, more particularly, the respondent nos. 3, 4 & 5 Page No. 3/4 to withdraw the order of defreezing. 5. A Communication dated 31.05.2025 has been received from the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu, which is available in the case record. In the said Communication, the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu has mentioned that as the amount of Rs. 62/603/- was refunded by the petitioner to the Bank Account of the victim, Sri Sudarsan via UPI, an official request was made from the Cyber Crime Police Station on 27.12.2024 to the Nodal Officer of IndusInd Bank to defreeze the Bank Account of the petitioner. 6. The above fact is also endorsed by the respondent no. 5 Bank in its counter affidavit. 7. From the Communication dated 31.05.2025, the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu and the counter affidavit of the respondent no. 5, it is noticed other than the afore-mentioned amount of Rs. 62,603/- which was traceable to the complaint lodged by Mr. Sudarsan at Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu, there are other complaints registered in the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal [NCRP]. The respondent no. 5 in its affidavit has mentioned about two disputed transactions in the form of credit, each for identical amount of Rs. 62,603/-, which got deposited in the Bank Account of the petitioner. By the said two disputed transactions, Rs. 62,603/- each was credited twice in the Bank Account of the petitioner. The said transactions have been reported in the NCRP as internet banking related frauds. The said two amounts of Rs. 62,603/- each were in connection with complaints lodged by one Sri Senthilkumar G at Cyber Crime Police Station, North Zone, Tondiarpet, Chennai, Tamil Nadu and one Sri Mahesh Kumar Nampally at Cyberabad Cyber Crime, Tamil Nadu. 8. The respondent bank has stated that though the lien marked over the Bank Account of the petitioner in connection with the instruction received from Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu has been lifted on receipt of the request from the said Police Station, the Bank Account of the petitioner is still kept on hold due to the other two internet banking related fraud complaints. Page No. 4/4 9. As this writ petition was preferred with regard to the freezing order made on the Bank Account of the petitioner pursuant to the instruction placed by Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu and which freezing order has already been withdrawn by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tamil Nadu with an official request to the respondent no. 5 Bank, there is no surviving cause of action to proceed further with the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. 10. If the petitioner has any other grievance with regard to the freezing orders placed on the Bank Account of the petitioner pursuant to the complaints indicated above, it is open for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy as permissible under the law. 11. The Letter bearing Memo no. V/HC-56/WP[C] No. 2113-25/2025/813 dated 09.05.2025 of the O/o the Commissioner of Police, Guwahati, placed by Ms. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam, is to be kept with the case record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant