Page No. 1/4 GAHC010032842026 2026:GAU-AS:9107 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1130/2026 NIRMAL CHANDRA ROY S/O LATE NILAKANTA ROY, R/O VILL. LAILURI, P.O.- LAILURI, P.S.- RUPAHIHAT, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782120 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF HOME, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6 2:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NAGAON P.O AND DIST.- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001 3:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE RUPAHIHAT POLICE STATION DIST.- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782120 4:HDFC BANK LIMITED NAGAON MISSION MARKET BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER NAGAON MISSION MARKET GROUND FLOOR GOSWAMI MARKET UBEDUR RAHMAN ROAD DIST.- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 78200 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. S ALOM, MS. A BEGUM,MR. M S ALAM Page No. 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, M HOSSAIN(R4),MR. M SMITH(R4) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 22.06.2026 Heard Mr. S. Alom, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. H. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1 – 3; and Mr. M. Smith, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. The petitioner has stated that he has availed financial facility in the form of a loan from M/s Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited. The loan amount sanctioned was Rs. 12 Lakhs. Out of the said sanctioned loan amount, Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited transferred an amount of Rs. 9,53,136/- on 22.07.2025 and an amount of Rs. 1,091/- on 23.07.2025 in the Bank Account no. 50100612804301, maintained by the petitioner at Nagaon Mission Market Branch, HDFC Bank. However, on 25.07.2025, by way of six suspicious transactions, a total amount of Rs. 7,03,738/- was withdrawn from the Bank Account of the petitioner at HDFC Bank, Nagaon Mission Market Branch. The petitioner immediately lodged a cyber complaint on 25.07.2025 itself. On 04.08.2025, the petitioner received a message from HDFC Bank, Nagaon Mission Market Branch [the respondent no. 4] at his registered mobile number to the effect that an amount of Rs. 7,03,738/- had been deposited in the petitioner’s Bank Account. Subsequently, the cyber complaint lodged by the petitioner stands transferred to Rupahihat Police Station on 09.08.2025. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court by the present writ petition projecting that despite the fact that the case has been transferred to Rupahihat Police Station for further investigation, no discernible action seems to have been taken by Rupahihat Police Station. As a result, the respondent no. 4 has kept the amount of Rs. 7,03,738/- on hold unauthorisedly. As a result, the petitioner has been deprived from utilizing the amount of Rs. 7,03,738/-, which is part of the loan amount sanctioned to him for business purpose. Page No. 3/4 4. As the case has been transferred to Rupahihat Police Station for further investigation, the learned Government Advocate, Assam was requested on a previous date to obtain instructions regarding the progress of investigation made in Rupahihat Police Station Case no. 174/2026, registered under Section 318[4] and Section 319[2], Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita [BNS], 2023. Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam has submitted, on receipt of instruction from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nagaon, that the investigation of the case is in progress and the statements of the petitioner-informant and the concerned Branch Manager, Nagaon Branch, HDFC Bank have already been recorded along with others under Section 180B, BNS. 5. As per the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 4, the Bank had, on receipt of the complaint from the petitioner vide Acknowledgment no. 20407250008423 regarding unauthorised transaction, had temporarily credited [Shadow reversal] the disputed amount of Rs. 7,03,738/- on 04.08.2025 in the petitioner’s Bank Account and the Bank had earlier marked the Bank Account of the petitioner as no debit on 25.07.2025 for safeguarding his interest. The temporary credit was done as per the Reserve Bank Circular dated 14.12.2017 on the subject : ‘Customer Protection – Limiting Liability of Customers of Co-operative Banks in Unauthorised Electronic Banking Transaction’, which is applicable to the respondent Bank also. It is stated that after receiving the complaint, the Bank had done a detailed investigation and it was found that the alleged disputed transaction of Rs. 7,03,738/- was validly executed using petitioner’s net banking password and other sensitive information, which was supposedly known only to the petitioner, followed by second factor authentication, that is, One Time Password [OTP], which was always sent to the petitioner’s registered mobile number and E-mail ID. By such projection, the Bank has stated that there was no deficiency and/or negligence on the part of the respondent Bank. It is stated that subsequently, the said amount was remitted on 08.09.2025. 6. It is further mentioned that the Bank Account of the petitioner was marked no debit due to pendency of the cyber crime complaint and for safeguarding the interest of the petitioner. However, the Bank has no objection to deactivate the no debit option marked in Page No. 4/4 the Bank Account of the petitioner. The Bank has already credited the entire disputed amount in the Bank Account of the petitioner on 17.06.2026 as a service gesture and in accordance with the RBI Circular. It is further stated that since the alleged fraudulent transaction is being investigated by the investigating agency, the respondent Bank authorities would provide due assistance in the investigation. 7. In so far as the grievance raised by the petitioner as regards the sum of Rs. 7,03,738/- and the other grievance regarding no debit instruction made in connection with Savings Bank Account no. 50100612804301 maintained at Nagaon Branch, HDFC Bank by the petitioner are concerned, the first of the said grievances has since been mitigated with the credit of the said amount in the Bank Account of the petitioner on 17.06.2026. As regards mitigation of the second grievance is concerned, the respondent Bank is to facilitate the same by taking necessary steps to allow the petitioner to operate his Bank Account within a period of one week from today. If in the process of crediting the sum of Rs. 7,03,738/- by the respondent Bank in the Bank Account of the petitioner any loss has been suffered by the respondent Bank and in the course of investigation, any amount is recovered, the investigating agency shall take into consideration such loss, if any, suffered by the respondent Bank on receipt of a complaint in this connection from the respondent Bank. 8. This order disposes of the writ petition. 9. The instructions placed by Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam in the form of Office Letter no. IV/NGN/281/2026/1493 dated 15.06.2026 are to be kept with the case record by marking them as Document ‘A’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant