RAM CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: KULDEEP MATHUR
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2026-08-10. RAM CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:38070] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6927/2026 CNR: RJHC010793212026 | URN: CRLMP / 12144U / 2026 Ram Choudhary S/o Roopa Ram, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Village Modi Sothra, Post Modi Joshiyan,tehsil Luni, District Jodhpur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Axis Bank, Branch 180, 181, Ground Floor, District Shopping Centre, Saraswati Nagar, Basni, Jodhpur Through Its Branch Manager. 3. Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch, Plot No. 184, 185 And 186- Nehal Tower, Saraswati Shoping Center, Basni,jodhpur Through Its Branch Manager. 4. State Bank Of India, Credit Card, Branch, New Pawer House Road, Patrakar Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur Through Its Branch Manager. 5. Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch, Katrap Naka, Badlapur East, Thane, Maharasthtra, Mumbai, Through Its Branch Manager. 6. The Deputy Inspector General, Cyber Crime, Police Head Quarters, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ratan Ankiya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP Mr. Aditya Singhi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:- [2026:RJ-JP:38070] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6927/2026] “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Criminal Misc petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate Petition, order or direction:- (i) The respondents may be directed to complete the investigation from the petitioner (if any) and allow the petitioner to operate his bank account on provisional basis without any interruption. (ii) The respondents bank may be directed to de-account bank freeze the saving (918010030818317 AND IFSC No. CODE-UTIB0003668) and (5212780801 AND IFSC CODE- KKBK0003636 AND SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO.
5212780801 AND IFSC CODE-KKBK0001349) allow the petitioner to operate his account and use his own amount deposited in the bank. (iii) The respondents bank may be directed to BLOCKED THE SBI CARD PULSE BANK ACCOUNT NO. 5554 4789 0761 5519 and allow the petitioner to operate his account and use his own amount deposited in the bank. (iv) The respondents may be directed to pay compensation at least Rs. 2,00,000/-(Rupees two Lakh) to the petitioner on account of the hardships being suffered by the petitioner due to non-operation of his bank account. (v) Any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner. ” 2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this misc. petition with a direction to the Axis Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank (respondent Nos.
2, 3 and 5) to keep the disputed amount (the amount which was transferred illegally in the bank account of the petitioner) frozen and allow the petitioner to make transactions from his bank account from the remaining balance. 3. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent – Bank has not received the information regarding the exact figure of the disputed amount, which the Investigating Officer/Police alleges to be receipt(s) of the offence, the bank shall send a communication to the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, to indicate the amount to be earmarked for lien, while endorsing a copy of the instant order. [2026:RJ-JP:38070] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6927/2026] 4. Upon receipt of such communication/letter, the concerned Investigating Officer/Police shall be under an obligation to apprise the respondent - Bank about the amount to be kept in lien, within a period of seven days of receiving the communication from the respondent - Bank.
The respondent – bank shall thereafter do the needful as directed herein above. 5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, then it shall be duty bound to act in accordance with the instant order. 6. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 60/Divya Raj Jasmatiya
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.