Authority: Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Order Date: Not specified

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Mukesh Sharma, represented by counsel Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary.
  • Respondents: State of Uttarakhand, Inspector In‑charge, Kotwali Jawalapur, District Haridwar (Respondent No. 2) and Kotak Mahindra Bank, Haridwar Branch (Respondent No. 3).
  • The petitioner challenged two letters: (i) a police letter dated 02‑05‑2025 directing the bank to freeze his account, and (ii) a subsequent freezing order dated 07‑05‑2025 issued by the bank.
  • The petitioner argued that the account was never declared case property; a charge‑sheet had been filed and the trial was underway, and Punjab National Bank had already defrozen the same account after investigation.
  • Respondent No. 3 contended that the freeze was made on the police’s request dated 02‑05‑2025.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held the freezing of the petitioner’s account to be wholly illegal as the police lacked authority to request a freeze on a non‑case property account.
  • The writ petition was allowed in its entirety.
  • A writ of mandamus was issued directing Respondent No. 2 (the police inspector) and Respondent No. 3 (the Kotak Mahindra Bank branch manager) to permit Mukesh Sharma to operate his account forthwith.

Topics: Banking, Legal