Sunil Das U H vs District Police Chief

Dr.Kauser Edappagath, J

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 6th respondent in freezing the bank account of the petitioner at the instance of the 4th respondent.

I have heard Sri. Rajit, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. M. P. Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor and Sri. Jithesh Menon, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 5 and 6.

The bank account of the petitioner was freezed in connection with Crime No.684/2024 of Valanchery Police Station, Malappuram. The petitioner filed an application before the 3rd respondent, who is the present Investigating Officer in the Crime No.684/2024, to recall the direction issued to the 4th respondent for freezing the account of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he is no way involved in the above said crime.

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that during the investigation it is revealed that no illegal amount has come to the account of the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor further submits that only the amount from the Government Treasury has been credited to the account of the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor adds that there is no objection in defreezing the account. Hence, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to issue necessary direction to the 5th respondent to defreeze the account of the petitioner within a period of three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 5th respondent shall defreeze the account of the petitioner within three days thereafter. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 4th respondent for compliance.