Madras High Court
Venkatesh Babu vs State Rep.By on 25 July, 2022
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P.Nos.16363 & 16454 of 2022
Venkatesh Babu ...
Petitioner
in Crl.OP.No.16363 of 2022
Sabareesan ... Petitioner
in Crl.OP.No.16454 of 2022
-Vs-
1. State rep.by
The Inspector of Police,
Royakottai Police Station,
Krishnagiri District.
2. The Manager
DBS Bank India Limited,
Royakottai Branch,
Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents
in both Crl.OPs
Prayer in Crl.OP.No.16363 of 2022: Criminal Original petition filed
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the
respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner bearing
Nos.0614301000000353 maintained with 2nd respondent viz., DBS
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022
Bank India Limited, Royakottai Branch, Krishnagiri District frozen in
Crime No.172 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police.
Prayer in Crl.OP.No.16454 of 2022: Criminal Original petition filed
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the
respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner bearing
Nos.0614301000000737 maintained with 2nd respondent viz., DBS
Bank India Limited, Royakottai Branch, Krishnagiri District frozen in
Crime No.172 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balamurugan
in both Crl.OPs
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Addl.Public Prosecutor for R1
in both Crl.OPs
COMMON ORDER
These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to direct the respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner bearing Nos.0614301000000353 & 0614301000000737 maintained with 2nd respondent viz., DBS Bank India Limited, Royakottai Branch, Krishnagiri District frozen in Crime No.172 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police.
2. These petitions have been filed challenging the freezing of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/7 Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022 Savings Bank Account of the petitioners maintained in the 2nd respondent Bank.
3. The case of the petitioners is that an FIR came to be registered in Cr.No.172 of 2021 against the petitioners for an offence under Sections 271, 328 IPC and Sections 7 and 20(1) of Cigaratte and other Tabacco Products Act, 2002. Thereafter the petitioners having been incarceration, moved bail application and released on bail with conditions to deposit Rs.25,000/- each. Having complied with the order the first respondent police on 20.06.2022 seems to have taken steps to freeze the Savings Bank Account of the petitioners. Aggrieved by the same, the present petitions have been filed before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that freezing of the Saving Bank accounts by the respondent police is totally unwarranted and the same is violative of the mandatory requirements under section 102 of Cr.P.C.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent Police submitted that since investigation is pending Bank https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/7 Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022 accounts cannot be de-freezed at this point of time.
6. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.
7. Freezing of Bank Accounts has been held to fall within the purview of Section 102 of Code of Criminal Procedure since the Bank Account is treated to be a movable property. Where the Bank Account is freezed without notice to the concerned person and report is not immediately sent to the jurisdictional Magistrate Court, the freezing of Bank Accounts gets vitiated and the same requires the interference of the Court.
8. Useful reference can be made to the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs.Tapas D.Neogy reported in 1997 (7) SCC Page 685. This Court has also taken into account the judgment of this Court in the case of T.Subbulakshmi and another vs. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai-8 and others reported in 2016 (2) MWN (Cr.) 411. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/7 Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022
9. In the present case, the Bank account has been freezed without notice to the petitioners and without a report submitted to the Magistrate. Therefore, the action on the part of the respondent police in freezing the Bank accounts maintained before the 2nd respondent Bank is completely vitiated and it is unsustainable in the eyes of law. Such view of the matter respondent police is directed to send a communication to the second respondent Bank to de-freeze the Bank accounts of the petitioners within a week from today i.e., 25.07.2022.
10. With the above direction, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed.
25.07.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order dpq To https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/7 Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022
1. The Inspector of Police, Royakottai Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/7 Crl.O.P.No.16363 of 2022 N. SATHISH KUMAR,J.
dpq Crl.O.P.Nos.16363 & 16454 of 2022 25.07.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/7