MANU/DE/1215/2025
Equivalent/Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC :1214
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P. (C) 17905/2024 and CM Appl. 2640/2025
Decided On: 20.02.2025
Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Manoj Jain, J.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Preetam Singh, Advocate
For Respondents/Defendant: Premtosh K. Mishra, CGSC, Manish Vashist, Sanya Kalsi,
Advocates, Gokul Sharma, G.P., Ritika Sisodiya, Ramesh Babu, Tanya Choudhary and
Rohan Srivastava, Advocates
JUDGMENT
Manoj Jain, J.
1. Petitioner Company is aggrieved by the manner in which its account has been frozen
by respondent No.2 Bank (HDFC Bank).
2 . The Bank seems to have acted upon communication dated 29.11.2024 which it
received from Vartaknagar Police Station, Thane, Maharashtra whereby they were, inter
alia, asked to debit- freeze said account of petitioner.
3. Notice was issued to respondents. State of Maharashtra was also impleaded as party
and was asked to submit report.
4 . However, subsequent to filing of the present writ petition, there is a significant
development in the matter.
5 . As admitted by both the sides, in terms of later communication dated 29.01.2025
received from the said investigating agency, the Bank has now been asked to remove
the Debit-freeze, while directing marking lien of Rs. 200/-.
6. In view of the aforesaid development, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the
petitioner is left with not much of the grievance and is no longer interested in pursuing
with the present petition. Though, liberty has been sought to take appropriate action as
permissible under law qua prayer (iii) in the present petition.
7. The petition stands disposed of as not pressed. Liberty as prayed, is granted.
8. Though, the prime grouse of petitioner seems to have been taken care of, this Court
feels persuaded to make certain observations.
9 . The issue raised in the present petition has been a matter of recurring concern as
many such like petitions are flooding the Courts. It is, therefore, high time that the
investigating/law enforcement agencies, in context of freezing bank accounts, act with
02-09-2025 (Page 1 of 4) www.manupatra.com Atul Agarwal
requisite care, caution and yes, compassion as well.
10. Undeniably, there is no qualm about competence of any such investigating agency
to issue such direction to the bank. But, what this Court finds, is lack of exhibiting any
reason while exercising the same.
11. In the present case, it is noteworthy that the petitioner s bank account, which had a
withdrawable balance of Rs. 93,50,05,208/-, was frozen due to innocuous entry of Rs.
200/- being credited therein. There is nothing to suggest that petitioner is suspect or
accused of any cyber-crime. The petitioner, quite possibly, may not even be connected
with the offence under investigation and might be unintended beneficiary. In such types
of cyber-crimes, if any fraudster cheats a complainant and with the help of cheated
money, when such fraudster buys something using such money, the police, chasing
such money-trail, directs freezing the bank accounts of all concerned and in the
process, many innocent recipients have to bear the brunt, for no fault of theirs.
12. Here, instead of directing preservation of disputed amount, which was mere Rs.
200/-, the bank was directed to freeze the entire account. Such action of freezing the
account, in its entirety, has, reportedly, left the petitioner high and dry. It has led to
significant adverse financial consequences, including dishonouring of several cheques
issued by the petitioner and the complete disruption of its business operations.
1 3 . While dealing with a petition involving a similar issue which happened with a
street-vendor, this Court had made following observation in Pawan Kumar Rai vs. Union
of India & Anr., MANU/DE/8946/2024.
"25. Indubitably, passing of an order of freezing the entire bank account of the
petitioner has a serious and adverse implication and invades and encroaches
upon his invaluable right to earn and live with dignity. The impugned action, in
essence, amounts to a violation of fundamental right of the petitioner, as it
directly undermines his right to livelihood, which is integral part of the Right to
Life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
26. Furthermore, when the Investigating Agency has identified a specific sum
credited to the bank account of the petitioner, it is difficult to comprehend as to
why the entire bank account of petitioner has been freezed.
27. Thus, the continued freezing of the entire bank account of the petitioner,
without even hinting that the petitioner was either mastermind or accomplice in
the cybercrime or knowingly received the funds as part of any illegal activity
will not be justifiable and sustainable, at the moment."
14. Investigating Agency is fully empowered to conduct investigation, and can also,
under appropriate circumstances, send request to the concerned bank, directing freezing
of the entire account.
15. However, when it resorts to above, it must assign reasons.
16. Such discretion vests with investigating agency, its better left to them to decide as
to when such blanket freezing needs to be ordered. However, once it chooses to do so,
it must offer some justification. Such blanket measure, if taken recourse to, without
offering any reason, can certainly play havoc with the financial concerns of such
account holders. In relation to small-time vendors, it can disrupt prospects of their
mere existence, even. It is not difficult to imagine that any such action can put their
02-09-2025 (Page 2 of 4) www.manupatra.com Atul Agarwal
lives in a complete disarray.
1 7 . Therefore, possibility of marking a lien on disputed amount, whenever it is
identifiable, should be explored as a more appropriate interim measure. Ideally, it
should be the first and foremost option. This would, naturally, mitigate the undue
hardship being caused on account of blanket freezing of account and would also ensure
that the alleged cheated money remains secured and intact.
18. It is pertinent to highlight that while dealing with a batch of petitions involving a
similar issue, Kerala High Court in Dr. Sajir Vs. Reserve Bank of India and others:
MANU/KE/3854/2023 also made observation which reads as under: -
"11. In the afore perspective, when the requisitions in these cases- by various
Police Authorities in several States of India mention the exact amount suspected
to have been credited to the accounts of the petitioners herein, one fails to
fathom why their bank accounts in full, should remain frozen. This is more so
because, even when the sums in question may have found credit in the
accounts of the petitioners, unless the investigation eventually reveals that they
were complicit in the Cyber Crime, or had received the same being aware of it,
they could never be construed to be accused."
12. In fact, should the criminal enquiry found otherwise, it will be doubtful if
the amounts in question could be even recovered from the petitioners, if they
have received it as part of bonafide or other valid transactions, unaware of it
being proceeds of crime."
1 9 . Learned counsel for the petitioner highlights the role of the Indian Cybercrime
Coordination Centre (I4C), Nodal Agency working under the aegis of Ministry of Home
Affairs. He suggests that such centre can, inter alia, provide a framework and eco-
system for Law Enforcement Agencies for dealing with Cybercrime in a coordinated and
comprehensive manner, including a graded response criterion for fraud cases based on
factors like transaction amount and account nature, periodical review of lien, creating a
nodal agency etc. It has also been suggested that unrelated individuals should rather be
notified, before account is directed to be freezed or before marking lien.
20. Learned counsel for Union of India states that while dealing with a similar kind of
issue, Jharkhand High Court has on 18.12.2023 in Court on its own motion Vs. The
State of Jharkhand and ors. W.P. (PIL) 6086/2023 given directions to prepare SOP to
deal with issues pertaining to such cyber-frauds and such matter is under consideration.
He also states that as per constitutional mandate, police, crime-prevention and
prosecution fall under the jurisdiction of State/UT police. Hence, they are to be dealt
with by respective State/UT police only.
21. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R, learned Standing Counsel for RBI also highlights that similar
issue cropped up before various other High Courts. Reference be made to Abdul Basith
vs. Cyber, Economic & Narcotic Crime, rep by Station House Officer and Another; 2025
SCC OnLine Ker 83 and Mohammed Saifullah vs. Reserve Bank of India, Rep. by its
Governor and Others MANU/TN/5406/2024. Considering the same, he suggests
preparation of a uniform advisory to deal with those. He, however, submits that such
advisory can only come from the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.
22. In light of the frequent filing of such matters concerning blanket freezing of the
accounts, this Court feels that Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India should
take proactive steps to address the same. It may consider consulting all concerned
02-09-2025 (Page 3 of 4) www.manupatra.com Atul Agarwal
stakeholders, including respective States/UTs and then, with consensus of everyone, to
chalk-out a uniform policy, standard operating procedures and guidelines to ensure that
such matters are handled with requisite consideration and compassion. The aim should
be to balance the rights of a complainant in any such criminal investigation vis-a-vis the
right of innocent and unwary account- holder, made to face unwarranted hardship on
account of blanket freezing of account, despite being completely innocent and unaware
of commission of any crime.
2 3 . A copy of this order be sent for information to respondent No.1 i.e. Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
02-09-2025 (Page 4 of 4) www.manupatra.com Atul Agarwal
