Kerala High Court
Muhammed Ali @ Muhammed Ali Basheer vs Federal Bank on 17 October, 2025
2025:KER:77804
W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 25TH ASWINA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 37282 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 MUHAMMED ALI @ MUHAMMED ALI BASHEER
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O BASHEER AV, RESIDING AT 12/389, AMMACHEETU VALAPPIL,
VATTENAD, KOOTTANAD PO, PATTITHARA, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, KERALA. NOW RESIDING AT HASSAN AL BAHARI, AL
QUSAIS, DAMSCUSS STREET, DUBAI., PIN - 679533
2 BASHEER AV, AGED 65 YEARS
C/O BAPPUTY AV, AMMACHEETU VALAPPIL, KOOTTANAD PO,
PATTITHARA PANCHAYAT, NAGALASSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
KERALA., PIN - 679533
BY ADVS.
SHRI.JASNEED JAMAL
SRI.P.SAMSUDIN
SMT.LIRA A.B.
SMT.DEVIKA E.D.
RESPONDENTS:
1 FEDERAL BANK
KOOTTANAD BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
BUILDING NO. 1/1326, SHIFA TOWER, GURUVAYOOR ROAD,
KOOTTANAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 679533
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER
THE FEDERAL BANK, KOOTTANAD BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
BRANCH MANAGER, BUILDING NO. 1/1326, SHIFA TOWER,
GURUVAYOOR ROAD, KOOTTANAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, KERALA.,
PIN - 679533
2025:KER:77804
W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025
2
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
CID, CYBER CRIME, BLOCK NUMBER 14, DR. JIVRAJ MEHTA
BHAVAN, SECTOR 10B, SECTOR 10, GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT.
EMAIL: [email protected]., PIN - 382010
SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:77804
W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025
3
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioners have filed this Writ Petition challenging the debit freezing/lien of their Bank accounts with the Respondent/Bank at the requisition of the Police Authorities. The case of the Petitioners is that the Petitioners are not an accused in the Crime registered by the Police authorities against some other persons, in which the requisition was made; that the Petitioners are in no way connected with the said Crime; and that the debit freezing/lien of the accounts 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 there were two liens 2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 4 marked based on the Requisitions from the Respondent No.3, of which one is for an amount of Rs.10,262/- in Account No.16970100022348 belonging to the Petitioner No.1 and the other is for an amount of Rs.27,728.69 in Account No.16974100000254 belonging to the Petitioner No.2, for debit freezing of the accounts of the Petitioners mentioned in the Writ Petition. Hence, the Bank has effected debit freezing of the accounts of the Petitioners.
3. This Court considered the same issue in Dr. Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India [2024 (1) KLT 826], and this Court issued the following directions:
"a. The respondent Banks arrayed in these cases, are directed to confine the order of freeze against the accounts of the respective Petitioners, only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the order / requisition issued to them by the Police Authorities. This shall be 2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 5 done forthwith, so as to enable the Petitioners to deal with their accounts, and transact therein, beyond that limit. b. The respondent - Police Authorities concerned are hereby directed to inform the respective Banks as to whether freezing of accounts of the Petitioners in these Writ Petitions will require to be continued even in the afore manner; and if so, for what further time, within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. c. On the Banks receiving the afore information / intimation from the Police Authorities, they will adhere with it and complete necessary action - either continuing the freeze for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be. d. If, however, no information or intimation is received by their Banks in terms of direction (b) above, the Petitioners or such among them, will be at full liberty to approach this Court again; for which purpose, all their contentions in these Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to them, to impel in future."
2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 6
4. Subsequently, this Court considered the same issue in Nazeer K.T. v. Manager, Federal Bank, Makkaraparamba Branch [2024 KHC 768].
5. In Nazeer K.T., this Court considered the scope of Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (corresponding to Section 106 of the BNSS), with reference to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy [(1999) 7 SCC 685], Teesta Atul Setalvad v. State of Gujarat [(2018) 2 SCC 372] and Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen and Others [(2024) 7 SCC 23], concurred with the view in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and added the following two more directions:
"(i) The Police officer concerned shall inform the Banks whether the seizure of the Bank account has been reported to the jurisdictional Magistrate and if not, the time limit within which the seizure will be reported. If no intimation as to the compliance or the proposal to comply with the Section 102 is informed to Bank within one month of 2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 7 receipt of a copy of the judgment, the Bank shall lift the debit freeze imposed on the Petitioner's account.
(ii) In order to enable the police to comply with the above direction, the Bank as well as the Petitioner shall forthwith serve a copy of this judgment to the officer concerned and retain proof of such service."
6. In Abhiraj Rajan v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC 1676], this Court considered the decisions in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and Nazeer K.T. (supra) and disposed of the Writ Petition, incorporating the directions contained in both Dr. Sajeer (supra) and Nazeer K.T. (supra).
7. I find that the Petitioners in this case is similarly placed, in all respects, with the Petitioners in the aforesaid three decisions of this Court in Dr. Sajeer (supra), Nazeer K.T. (supra) and Abhiraj Rajan (supra), and the Petitioners are entitled to get the same directions in this writ petition.
2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 8
8. It is contended that there are chances of uncommunicated or further requisitions for debit freezing/lien with respect to the same accounts, and in such case, the directions of this Court in this judgment may not stand in the way of the Banks effecting debit freezing/lien. It is contended that utilization of the frozen/lien amount may be at the disposal of the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court. I find force in these submissions, and I find it expedient to include two additional directions to the aforesaid directions in Dr. Sajeer (supra) and Nazeer K.T. (supra).
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i. The Respondent/Bank is directed to confine the order of debit freeze/lien against the accounts of the Petitioners only to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the orders / requisitions issued to the Bank by the Police Authorities and it shall be done forthwith so as to 2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 9 enable the Petitioners to deal with their accounts and transact therein beyond that limit.
ii. The respondents - Police Authorities concerned are hereby directed to inform the Bank as to whether freezing/lien of the accounts of the Petitioners will require to be continued even in the aforesaid manner; and if so, for what further time, within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. iii. On the Bank receiving the aforesaid information / intimation from the Police Authorities, the Bank will adhere to it and complete necessary action - either continuing the freeze/lien for such period as mentioned therein; or withdrawing it, as the case may be. iv. If, however, no information or intimation is received by the Bank in terms of direction (ii) above, the Petitioners will be at full liberty to approach this Court again; for which purpose, all his contentions in the Writ Petitions are left open and reserved to him, to impel in the future.
2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 10 v. The Police Officer concerned shall inform the Bank whether the seizure of the Bank Accounts have been reported to the jurisdictional Magistrate, and if not, the time limit within which the seizure will be reported. If no intimation as to the compliance or the proposal to comply with Section 102 Cr.P.C. (Section 106 BNSS) is informed to the Bank within one month of receipt of a copy of the judgment, the Bank shall lift the debit freeze/lien imposed on the Petitioners' accounts.
vi. In order to enable the police to comply with the above direction, the Bank as well as the Petitioners shall forthwith serve a copy of this judgment to the officer concerned and retain proof of such service. vii. The directions of this Court in this judgment will not stand in the way of the Bank effecting debit freezing/lien based on the requisitions communicated in the future to the Bank with respect to the same accounts of the Petitioners, and in such case, the Petitioners will be at liberty to challenge the same.
2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 11 viii. The frozen/lien amount, if any, lying in the accounts of the Petitioners in accordance with the aforementioned directions, shall be at the disposal of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
Sd/-
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE vgd 2025:KER:77804 W.P(C)No.37282 of 2025 12 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37282/2025 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 01-08-2025 RECEIVED BY 1ST PETITIONER FROM RESPONDENT BANK EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 01-08-2025 RECEIVED BY 2ND PETITIONER FROM RESPONDENT BANK