Kerala High Court
Qatar Petroleum vs State Of Kerala on 9 March, 2026
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:21134
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
QATAR PETROLEUM
12/187 A MAMPAD, MALAPPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER JINI,
AGED 38 YEARS, W/O SUDHEER BABU POOKKODAN, KODAPPATHUR
PARAMBIL HOUSE, NORTH KOZHAKKOTTUR,
AREACODE P O, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 673639
BY ADVS.
KUM.GAYATHRI MURALEEDHARAN
SMT.ARCHANA B.
SHRI.AJIN K. KURIAKOSE
SMT.SRUTHILAKSHMI SHAJI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695001
2 THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS GOVERNER HEAD OFFICE,
MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 400029
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:21134
3 HDFC BANK LIMITED
BUILDING NO: 683, SIENNA COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, NILAMBUR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 679329
4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
C DIVISION POLICE STATION (GANDHIGRAM C DIV) OLD POST
OFFICE/GANDHIGRAM AREA, JUNAGADH,
GUJARAT, INDIA, PIN - 362001
5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION CYBERABAD 2-50/22, 2-48/16, LANE,
NEXT TO CARE HOSPITALS, JAYABHERI PINE VALLEY,
GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA ,INDIA EMAIL-
[email protected], PIN - 500032
6 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
BERHAMPORE POLICE STATION BERHAMPORE PS CHITTA RANJAN DAS
RD, GORA BAZAR, BERHAMPORE, MURSHIDABAD DISTRICT,
WEST BENGAL ,
INDIA [email protected], PIN - 742101
7 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
NILAMBUR POLICE STATION CNG MAIN ROAD,
NILAMBUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 679329
ADDL.R8 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
AMTALI POLICE STATION,
ARUNDHAUTI NAGAR,
MADHUPUR, AGARTALA,
TRIPURA (UNDER WEST TRIPURA DISTRICT), PIN- 799022
ADDL.R9 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
POLICE COMMISSIONER OFFICE PIMPRI CHINCHWAD,
PREMLOK PARK ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR,
BHOIRNAGAR, AKURDI,
PIMPRI-CHINCHWAD, MAHARASHTRA, PIN- 411033
ADDL.R10 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
DOMBIVALI POLICE STATION, MANPADA ROAD, PENDSE NAGAR,
DOMBIVALI EAST, DOMBIVALI, MAHARASHTRA- PIN - 421201
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:21134
ADDL.R11 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
RACHAKONDA CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION,
RACHAKONDA POLICE COMMISSIONERATE HEADQUARTERS,
BESIDE MALKAJGIRI COURT COMPLEX,
NEREDMET, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA, PIN - 500056
[ADDL. 8 TO R11 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 09.03.2026
IN I.A. 1/2026 IN WP(C) 1754/2026]
BY ADVS.
SMT.K.PARVATHY
SRI.AADITHYAN S.MANNALI
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.TONY AUGUSTINE-GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026
4
2026:KER:21134
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the debit freezing/lien of its Bank account with the Respondent/Bank at the requisition of the Police Authorities. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner is not an accused in the Crime registered by the Police authorities against some other persons, in which the requisition was made; that the Petitioner is in no way connected with the said Crime; and that the debit freezing/lien of the account is in violation of Sections 106 & 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
2. The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Bank, after getting instructions from the Bank, confirmed that the Bank has received the Requisitions from the Respondent Nos.4, 5, 6 and 8 for Rs.450/-, Rs.250/-, Rs.4,000/- and Rs.800/- respectively, WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:21134 from the Respondent No.9 for Rs.900/- and Rs.2,900/-, from the Respondent No.10 for Rs.500/- and from the Respondent No.11 for Rs.185/- and Rs.1,000/-, totalling Rs.10,985/-, for marking lien/freeze in the account of the Petitioner mentioned in the Writ Petition, and hence, the Bank has effected freezing of the account of the Petitioner. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is a petroleum outlet, which is not disputed by the Respondent/Bank. Considering the fact that the Petitioner is a petroleum outlet, the Account of the Petitioner can be permitted to be operated, limiting the lien to Rs.10,985/-. The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Bank further submitted that the Bank has prevented the operation of the account of the Petitioner since the Bank is having suspicion with respect to the operation of the account.
3. The issue with respect to the freezing of the bank account at the requisition of the police authorities is covered by the decisions WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:21134 of this Court in Dr. Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India [2024 (1) KLT 826], Nazeer K.T. v. Manager, Federal Bank, Makkaraparamba Branch [2024 KHC 768] and Abhiraj Rajan v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC 1676]. This Court has been consistently issuing the directions to the effect that the Bank is to permit the account holder to operate his account limiting the lien to the amounts shown in the Requisitions received by the Bank so long as the Bank does not have any suspicion that the account is used for any financial cybercrime activities or money mule activities, making the frozen/lien marked amount at the disposal of the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court. Recently, the Indian Cyber Crime Co- Ordination Centre of the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of India has formulated an SOP for NCRP - CFCFRMS, Custody, Restoration of Money and Grievance Redressal 2026 to establish a fair and transparent system that prescribes a uniform process to be followed by all the Participating Entities. The SOP WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:21134 includes procedures to prevent misuse of the system of putting on hold an amount, seizure of an account and any property to help the victims of Cyber-Enabled Financial Crimes (CEFC), and to give interim custody of the amount to the victim and restoration of such property while ensuring accountability of all the participants for their action and inaction and providing avenues for time-bound grievance redressal for parties affected by actions taken based on information provided by the system. It is intended that States and UTs, working with other Participating Entities, follow the SOP and are successful in preventing defrauded money from leaving the financial system, giving interim custody and restoration of the amount to the victim, and, in the process, help create a cybercrime-resilient financial ecosystem. Clause 10 of the SOP provides for a time- bound Grievance Redressal Mechanism for the Account Holders in whose accounts the amounts are put on hold or WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 8 2026:KER:21134 whose account operation is suspended. It is for the Petitioner to work out his remedies in accordance with Clause 10 of the SOP, with respect to the frozen/lien/hold amount.
4. With respect to the prevention of operation of the Account of the Petitioner by the Bank without any requisition from any Police Authorities, this Court has laid down certain guidelines to be followed by the Bank in Abdul Azeez v. Union of India [2025 KLT OnLine 3447]. The above SOP does not deal with the prevention of accounts by the Bank on its own suspicion without any requisition from any authority. Hence, the Respondent/Bank is to follow the guidelines in Abdul Azeez (supra) since the Bank has stopped the operation of the account, entertaining suspicion.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 9 2026:KER:21134
i) The Respondent/Bank is directed to provide details of the suspicious transactions to the Petitioner within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to enable the Petitioner to submit its explanation and is further directed to act in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines laid down by this Court in Abdul Azeez (supra).
ii) If the Respondent/Bank is satisfied with the explanation submitted by the Petitioner for the suspicious transactions, the Respondent/Bank is directed to confine the freeze/lien/hold to the aforesaid amount and permit the Petitioner to operate the Account.
iii) The disposal of the frozen/lien/hold amount shall be in accordance with the above SOP.
iv) Petitioner is free to redress its grievance through the Grievance Redressal Mechanism provided under Clause 10 of the above SOP with respect to the frozen/lien/hold amount.
WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 10 2026:KER:21134
v) The Respondent/Bank is free to effect further lien/hold/freeze in case of receipt of future requisitions.
Sd/-
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE Shg/ WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 11 2026:KER:21134 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 1754 OF 2026 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK DATED 17.12.2025