High CourtsSingle Bench

Parnav Online Solutions Private Limited vs IDFC Bank Limited

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 20 March 2026 · Citation: (2026) 03 P&H CK 1188

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jagmohan Bansal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 226, 227 · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 107
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1715 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

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

9 paragraphs · 332 words

Jagmohan Bansal, J

1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking directions to defreeze his Bank Account No.10122331587 maintained with respondent-Bank.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s account has been frozen at the behest of Law Enforcement Agencies. The petitioner is neither named as an accused nor shown to have any prima facie nexus with the alleged offence. There is no order of Magistrate in terms of Section 107 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (‘BNSS’), thus, attachment of account is bad in the eye of law. There is no FIR against him. It is not involved in any criminal activity. The respondent has mechanically attached his amount.

3.

Learned counsel for respondent-Bank submits that account has been frozen on the direction of Law Enforcement Agencies due to suspicious transactions amounting to Rs.5,12,195/-. He concedes that no civil or criminal proceedings qua amount involved are pending against the petitioner.

4.

Heard the arguments and perused the record.

5.

From the perusal of record and arguments of both sides, it is evident that no FIR has been registered against the petitioner. No order of attachment under Section 107 of BNSS has been passed by the Magistrate. The respondent has freezed account whereas a sum of Rs.5,12,195/- has been marked suspicious. Claim of petitioner is gunine and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, respondent-Bank is direted to de-freeze petitioner’s account within three days from today. The petitioner is at liberty to operate its bank account subject to maintaining balance of Rs.5,12,195/-.

6.

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.

7.

Disposed of in above terms.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.