Karnataka High Court
Kumar @ P K Behera vs State Bank Of India on 12 July, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:27083
WP No. 15169 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 15169 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT JAYANTHI BEHERA
W/O KUMAR @ P K BEHERA
AGE 51 YEARS,
R/O: A802, OCEANUS TRANQUIL,
DR. B R AMBEKDAR ROAD,
MARGONDANAHALLI, BENGALURU NORTH,
BENGALURU - 560 036.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION BANK OF INDIA
DOMLUR BRANCH,
NO. 11, BRINDAVAN SERVICE RD,
DOMLUR LAYOUT, DOMLUR 1ST STAGE,
1ST STAGE, DOMLUR
BENGALURU - 560 071.
Digitally signed
by Vandana S 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: HIGH REPRESENTED BY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR
COURT OF SIRSI RURAL POLICE, SIRSI,
KARNATAKA UTTAR KANNADA - 581 401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED LETTER
OF INSTRUCTION PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AS AGAINST THE
PETITIONER IN ANNX-D DATED 28.08.2020 AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR CONSIDERATION OF INTERIM
PRAYER, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:27083
WP No. 15169 of 2024
ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"(A) To issue Writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned letter of instruction passed by Respondent No.2 as against the petitioner in Annexure-D, dated 28.08.2020 in the interest of justice and equity.
(ii) To issue writ in the nature of Mandamus directing Respondent No.1 to unfreeze and reactivate the account of the petitioner bearing A/c No.331202050000018 in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of petitioner's bank account No.331202050000018 out of the total transaction amount, the disputed amount is only Rs.50,000/- and that the petitioner has no objection for a lien to be created on the said amount and necessary directions may be issued to the respondent No.1 - bank to defreeze the aforesaid subject account by marking a lien only to an extent of disputed amount, which is Rs.50,000/-. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in Razorpay Software Private Limited -3- NC: 2024:KHC:27083 WP No. 15169 of 2024 Vs. The State of Karnataka and another - W.P.No.62/2022 dated 22.09.2022 and N. Nagaraju Vs. State of Karnataka and another - W.P.No.27214/2023 dated 23.01.2024.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and learned CGC for respondent No.1 submits that the present petition may be disposed of in terms of the judgment passed in Razorpay Software Private Limited by marking a lien to an extent of Rs.50,000/- in the account of the petitioner.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the judgment of this Court in Razorpay's case, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing to defreeze the aforesaid bank account No.331202050000018 of the petitioner in respondent No.1 - bank by marking lien only to an extent of Rs.50,000/-. It is needless to state that marking of the said lien would be subject to the final out come of the investigation.
6. Subject to the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMC : List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28