- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 27650 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SONU KUMAR AGED 35 YEARS, S/O ROSHAN PAL, UDAIHERI, HARIDWAR, UTTARKHAND 247656 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATHIES KUMAR S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KGF CEN CRIME POLICE STATION, KGF DISTRICT KOLAR 563101 2. HDFC BANK LTD NEHRU COLONY, DEHRADUN UTTARAKHAND 248001 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, AGA FOR R1 SRI. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADVOCATE FOR R2(VK NOT FILED)] Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 TO IMMEDIATELY CONVERT THE COMPLETE DEBIT FREEZE ON THE PETITIONERS BANK ACCOUNT TO A LIEN FREEZE ONLY ON THE DISPUTED AMOUNT OF INR 10,000 (RUPEES TEN THOUSAND ONLY) THEREBY ALLOWING THE PETITIONER ACCESS TO HIS REMAINING LEGITIMATE FUNDS IN THE ACCOUNT. DIRECTIONS TO RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF RESPONDENT NO.1 REGARDING MODIFICATION OF ACCOUNT FREEZE FROM COMPLETE DEBIT FREEZE TO LIEN FREEZE ON THE SPECIFIED DISPUTED AMOUNT ONLY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING FRESH MATTERS LIST, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Captioned petition is filed by a customer of a respondent No. 2-bank, being aggrieved by the action of respondent No. 2 in debit freezing petitioner's account on a communication received from the Investigating Agency. 2. This matter was adjourned on the previous date of hearing to enable the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the Investigating Agency to secure instructions as to the tentative quantum of the alleged - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 crime proceeds, which formed the basis for issuance of communication to the respondent–Bank resulting in debit freezing of the petitioner’s account. 3. Today, the learned AGA, on instructions, submits that the Investigating Agency has quantified the alleged crime proceeds at Rs.10,000/-. The said submission is placed on record. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, this Court proceeds to examine the legality and proportionality of the action impugned. This Court has, in a catena of cases, consistently held that debit freezing of a bank account of a citizen has serious civil and financial ramifications. While it is open to the Investigating Agency, in a given set of circumstances, to take necessary measures to secure and preserve the alleged crime proceeds particularly where there exists a reasonable apprehension of dissipation of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 such proceeds, the action must satisfy the test of proportionality. 5. It is often noticed that upon issuance of a communication by the Investigating Agency, the Bank, as a matter of course, proceeds to completely freeze the account, thereby rendering the account inoperative and depriving the account holder of access to legitimate funds. Such an action, though intended to secure the alleged proceeds of crime, results in undue hardship and prejudice to the account holder, especially when the alleged tainted amount is capable of precise identification and segregation. 6. In the case on hand, the Investigating Agency itself has quantified the alleged crime proceeds at Rs.10,000/-. Therefore, the ends of justice would be adequately met if a lien is marked to the said extent, thereby securing the interest of the prosecution. At the same time, permitting the petitioner to operate the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 account beyond the said amount would strike a just balance between the investigative needs of the State and the fundamental right of the petitioner to carry on his financial affairs. 7. This Court is therefore of the considered opinion that continuation of a complete debit freeze is neither warranted nor proportionate in the facts of the present case. A limited restraint by way of lien to the extent of Rs.10,000/- would sufficiently safeguard the interests of the Investigating Agency without causing undue prejudice to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed in part. (ii) The respondent No.2–Bank is directed to forthwith defreeze the petitioner’s bank account - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19510 WP No. 27650 of 2025 bearing No. 50100489654760, except to the limited extent of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). (iii) The respondent No.2–Bank shall mark a lien on the aforesaid account to the extent of
10,000/-, which shall remain in force pending completion of the investigation and/or till culmination of the criminal proceedings. (iv) The petitioner shall be at liberty to operate the bank account freely in respect of any amount in excess of Rs.10,000/-, and the respondent–Bank shall not impose any restriction on such operation beyond the aforesaid lien amount. (v) It is made clear that the aforesaid arrangement shall be subject to the result of the criminal proceedings and any further orders that may be passed by the competent Court. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43