Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dushyant Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157
1 WP-32370-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
ON THE 9 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 32370 of 2025
DUSHYANT SINGH AND ANOTHER
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Pankaj Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Dileep Kumar Awasthi- Govt. Advocate for the
respondents/State.
Shri Dhirendra Singh Chouhan- Advocate for the respondent No.3.
Shri Romesh Pratap Singh- Advocate for the Intervener.
ORDER
1. This instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks following reliefs.
"(I) That, respondent authority may kindly be directed to consider the case of petitioners and removed the hold from the account of petitioners bearing No. 13301000005245 and 13301000001389 forthwith. (II) That, other relief doing justice including cost be awarded."
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that vide communication dated 29.5.2025 issued by the respondent No.3, the petitioner No. 2 was informed that his bank account number 13301000001389 maintained with respondent No.3 bank has been debit freezed in compliance Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 2 WP-32370-2025 of the letter dated 17.05.2025 issued by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Janakganj, District Gwalior. He submits that communication dated 17.05.2025 placed on record as Annexure P-6 indicates that the Station House Officer-respondent No.2 had directed the respondent No.3 to debit freeze the accounts of the petitioners on account of registration of a case under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 [hereinafter referred to as "IPC"] vide Crime No.547 of 2024 against the petitioner No. 1. He submits that the FIR vide Crime No.547 of 2024 filed with the petition as Annexure P-3 indicates that neither the petitioners are accused in the said case nor the said offence is in relation with the bank account of the petitioners, yet on an illegal communication dated 17-5-2025 issued by respondent No. 3, the bank accounts of the petitioners has been debit freezed.
3. In fact, on the complaint made by the wife of the petitioner No.1 namely, Rachna Singh, (intervener in the matter) an FIR vide Crime No. 545 of 2024, has been registered against the petitioner No.1 by respondent No. 3, wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner No. 1, had deceived the complainant-wife with an amount to the tune of Rs. 32,95,000/-. However, till date, respondent No. 2 had not apprised the bank with the correct crime number for debit freezing the accounts of the petitioners and respondent- bank is still continuing with the debit-freeze of the bank accounts of the petitioners on the basis of erroneous communication. He further submits that the documents filed along with I.A. No. 1188 of 2026 indicates that there exists a civil dispute between the petitioner No.1 and his wife/intervener, who had served a legal notice on the petitioner No.1 for return of the alleged Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 3 WP-32370-2025 amount failing which, the court proceedings are sought to be initiated. However, to circumvent the proceedings of civil nature, at her behest, FIR in question has been lodged against the petitioner No.1 vide Crime No. 545 of 2024, and in the said proceedings, the bank accounts of the petitioners have been debit freezed. He submits that unless an order is obtained from the concerned Magistrate in terms of Section 107 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the respondent No. 2 is not authorized to direct the respondent No. 3 to debit freeze the bank accounts of the petitioners, and the said aspect has been considered by the Kerala High Court in CRL. MC No. 3740 of 2025 which order has been affirmed by the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 13433/2025 titled as State of Kerala and Another v. Head Star Global Pvt. Ltd. and Another . Accordingly, he submits that appropriate direction for lifting the debit freeze from the bank account of the petitioner deserves to be issued, and the petition deserves to be allowed.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsels appearing for the state as well as the intervener-Rachna Singh, submits that Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereinafter referred as "Cr.P.C"] empowers the Investigating Officer to direct for debit freezing the bank account, in case the bank account is connected to the commission of crime and, since now the Investigation is already complete in the matter as per the own showing of the petitioners and the challan has been filed, the remedy lies to the petitioners to invoke Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C before the concerned trial Court for appropriate direction and the writ petition filed seeking the relief claimed herein itself is not maintainable. In support of said contentions, the learned Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 4 WP-32370-2025 counsel appearing for the intervener and State places reliance on the judgment of the apex court in the case of State of Bengal v. Anil Kumar Dey (Criminal Appeal No. 5373 of 2025 decided on 10.12.2025) and the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Teesta Atul Setalvad V. State of Gujarat; (2018) 2 SCC 372.
5. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
6. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
7. Record of the case indicates that respondent No. 2 vide communication dated 17.05.2025 (Annexure P-6) informed the respondent No. 3 that the bank account of the petitioners is connected in Crime No. 547 of 2024 for offence under Section 406 of IPC, wherein, certain huge monetary transaction between the petitioner No.1 and complainant have been undertaken and thereby directed the respondent No. 3 to debit freeze the bank accounts. The counsel appearing for the petitioners may be right in contending that they are not accused in FIR bearing Crime No. 547 of 2024. However, undisputed fact remains that petitioner No.1 is an accused in FIR bearing crime number 545 of 2024 for commission of offence under section 406 of IPC, wherein, the intervener is the complainant and sum of Rs. 32,95,000/- is the amount involved in the aforesaid crime number. The mentioning of incorrect crime number as 547 of 2024 in the communication dated 17.05.2025 at the best can be said to be an inadvertent error in writing while mentioning the crime number. However, a perusal of the documents placed on record, including the FIR and the final report/challan, clearly Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 5 WP-32370-2025 indicates that petitioner No. 1 is an accused in FIR bearing Crime No. 545 of 2024 being connected with the bank accounts in question. In the considered opinion of this court, the aforesaid inadvertent error in writing cannot form any basis for the petitioners to seek relief as claimed in the petition.
8. In so far as the issue of maintainability of the instant writ petition, after filing of the challan for the reliefs claimed is concerned, much reliance has been placed by the petitioners on the judgment dated 22nd June 2025 passed by the High Court of Kerala in the case of Head Star Global (supra) . However, a perusal of the facts of the case indicates that even in the said case, the applicant initially moved to the Magistrate seeking lift of debit freeze of the bank account and it is only thereafter, the aforesaid order was challenged before the High Court. In the instant case, the petitioners have directly approached this court for the relief as claimed without exhausting the remedy before the trial Court wherein the challan has been filed by the investigating authority.
9. The competence of the Investigating Officer to direct for debit freeze of the bank accounts and the forum available to the person aggrieved came up for consideration before the Apex Court in the case of Anil Kumar Dey (supra), relevant para-9 of which reads as under:-
"9. The text of Section 102, Cr.P.C., has already been reproduced supra. From a studied analysis of the judgments of this Court involving this provision, the following principles/aspects can be highlighted:
9.1 Under this Section, property that is alleged/suspected to be stolen; is the object of crime;
has a direct link to the commission of the offence, can be seized. [See: M.T. Enrica Lexie v. Doramma ] 9.2 The police have the power to seize passports and bank accounts under this Section. [See: Tapas D. Neogy (supra), Suresh Nanda v. CBI , Teesta Atul Setalvad v.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 6 WP-32370-2025 State of Gujarat.
9.3 Orders of freezing issued under this Section, can only be in effect to aid investigation. [See: Jermyn Capital LLC v. CBI] Once the investigation is complete, that ipso facto, does not entitle the person whose bank accounts have been frozen, to have them released. It shall, however, be open to them to apply to the concerned authority for the same, and the authority shall consider the same in accordance with law. [See:Teesta Atul Setalvad (supra)] 9.4 The police do not have the power to seize any immovable property. It cannot dispossess someone who is in possession of the immovable property. [See:
Nevada Properties (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra ] 9 . 5 It is not an enabling provision under which the police may, to do justice, seize the property and hand it over to whom they believe to be the rightful owner thereof. [See: Nevada Properties (P) Ltd. (supra)]"
(Emphasis supplied)
10. In view of the proposition as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Kumar Dey (supra) , the admission to the instant writ petition is declined. The petitioners are set at liberty to avail the remedy under Sections 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C before the trial Court, wherein the challan has been filed by the respondent No.2. It is pertinent to mention here that the FIR in question specifically states that the amount in connection with crime number is to the tune of Rs. 32,95,000/-, and during pendency of the present writ petition, this Court vide interim order dated 17.12.2025 directed that the bank account of the petitioners with respondent No. 3/Bank shall be debit freezed only up to the extent of Rs. 32,95,000/-, and the petitioners shall be permitted to operate the account with respect to remaining balance. The said interim arrangement shall continue to remain in operation and it shall be open for the petitioner to seek further orders in the said regard from the learned Trial Court, which shall be decided by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:5157 7 WP-32370-2025
11. It is clarified that merits of rival contentions of the parties have not been commented upon by this Court in the instant order and all contentions in the said regard are left open to be decided by the trial Court.
12. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. All interlocutory applications stand disposed of.
(AMIT SETH) JUDGE ar Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 2/11/2026 6:35:35 AM