AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 353 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to de-freeze its Current Account No.5945062120 maintained with respondent No.1-Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, SCO 36-37, F Block, Upper Ground, BRS Nagar, Ludhiana-141012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a proprietorship concern engaged in the business of trading of goods. Some fraudsters have deposited a sum of ₹70,996/- in its account with intent to cheat. The fraudsters are adopting different ways and means to entice people to share their bank details or deposit money in their illegal accounts. The petitioner has no concern with aforesaid deposit. There is no FIR against him. He is not involved in any criminal activity. The respondent has mechanically attached its account.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 concedes that no criminal case has been registered against the petitioner. No civil or criminal proceedings qua amount involved are pending against him. This Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 passed in CWP No.31234 of 2024, Labpreet Kaur v. Union of India and others has already ordered to de-freeze bank account in such circumstances. The bank has no objection if account is de-freezed.
Heard the arguments and perused the record.
From the perusal of record and submissions of both sides, it is evident that there are suspicious transactions of ₹70,996/- in the petitioner’s account. It is a proprietorship concern. No FIR is registered against him. He is not involved in any criminal case. No order of attachment under Section 107 of BNSS has been passed by the Magistrate. Claim of petitioner is genuine and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, respondent No.1-Bank is hereby directed to de-freeze petitioner’s bank account within three days from today.
As conceded by petitioner, the disputed amount shall not be utilized by it. It will remain freezed. It is made clear that this order shall not legalize any act or omission on the part of petitioner, if at any stage, petitioner is found involved in the commission of any offence or violation of provision of any law in force.