Tanu Saree Centre Through Proprietor Pooja Namdev vs. Canara Bank Through Its Branch Manager
Held
The Court held that the decisions in "Malcolm Murayis" and "Archana" were applicable to the present case. The Court directed that the disputed amount mentioned in the petition should be kept in a Fixed Deposit (FD). If the bank received any further complaints regarding other entries, it could take appropriate action in accordance with law, keeping in mind the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) issued by the Government. The disputed amount would be allowed to be liquidated only after orders were passed by a competent Judicial Magistrate within three months. If the police agency did not proceed in accordance with law within this period, the amount in FD could be withdrawn by the petitioner after intimating the police agency. Crucially, the Court ordered that the bank account of the petitioner shall be unfrozen, and the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the account.
Facts
The petitioner, Tanu Saree Centre, through its proprietor Pooja Namdev, filed a writ petition seeking the removal of a freeze imposed on its bank account (Canara Bank account No. 120030198088) without lawful authority. The petitioner argued that its case was covered by previous High Court judgments in "Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others" and "Archana Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others." These judgments dealt with similar issues of bank accounts being frozen based on cyber crime allegations. The petitioner contended that they were lawfully conducting business and had not received any notice regarding involvement in offenses. The bank stated it had frozen the account based on instructions from cyber cell police stations.
Key Issues
1. Whether the freeze imposed on the petitioner's bank account by the respondent bank, based on instructions from cyber cell police stations, is legal and arbitrary, violating the petitioner's right to conduct business. (Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the freeze was illegal and arbitrary, as they had not received any notice of involvement in any offense and were lawfully conducting their business. They relied on the High Court's decisions in "Malcolm Murayis" and "Archana," which addressed similar grievances regarding the freezing of bank accounts in cyber crime cases. They asserted that the bank acted without lawful authority. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue or state. The bank, as a respondent, contended that it had frozen the account solely on the instructions of various cyber cell police stations and was bound by those directives.
Sections Cited
Article 19(1)(g), Article 226, Section 102 of Cr.P.C.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs: (1) to allow the petition with cost. (2) direct the respondents to remove the illegal and arbitrary freeze/hold imposed on the petitioner's bank accounts, namely Canara Bank account No. 120030198088, IFSC Code CNRB0004779 which have been frozen without any lawful authority or order. (3) Issue such other orders, writ, and direction as this Hon’ble court deems fit in the interest of justice in favor of petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of India and Others Malcolm Murayis & Ors. Vs. State Bank of
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.