High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed of with directions to regulate freezes...

Sanoop K P v Union of India & others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Devan Ramachandran
Judgment Date
2024-03-15
Court Decision / Holding
The court disposed of the writ petition with directions: (a) the bank shall immediately seek from the Investigation Authority/Police Authority the amount that must be kept frozen or held in lien, and shall act within one month from the date of this judgment; (b) if the Police responses specify a particular amount, the freeze shall be confined to that amount, allowing the petitioner to transact beyond that limit; (c) if no information is received within two months, the petitioner shall be allowed to transact fully in his account, subject to any future information from the Police; (d) alternatively, if the Police state that the entire account should be frozen for any reason, the bank shall inform the petitioner and continue the freeze for eight months; (e) if after eight months the requisition is not withdrawn, the petitioner may approach this Court again with all contentions reserved.
Final Disposition
Disposed of with directions to regulate freezes as per the outlined framework.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Sanoop K P

Respondents

  • Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs
  • National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
  • National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
  • National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
  • Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre
  • State of Gujarat
  • State of Maharashtra
  • State of Rajasthan
  • Director General of Police, Gujarat
  • Director General of Police, Maharashtra
  • Director General of Police, Rajasthan
  • Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Cell, Gandhinagar, Gujarat
  • Station House Officer, Tulinj Police Station, Vasai-Virar, Maharashtra
  • Station House Officer, Jaipur Police Station, Rajasthan
  • Reserve Bank of India
  • Punjab National Bank
  • South Indian Bank
  • Canara Bank

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • T.S. Sarath
  • • Manu Ramachandran
  • • M. Kiranlal
  • • R. Rajesh (Varkala)
  • • Sameer M Nair
  • • Jothisha K.A.
  • • Sailakshmi Menon
  • • Aashi K. Shajan
  • • Smt. Akhila B.
  • • Atul Vinayak P.S.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • P. A. Augustine
  • • Santheep Ankarath, SC
  • • S. Manu, DSGI
  • • M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar, SC
  • • S. Sunil Shanker, SC

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition (WP(C) 8636 of 2024) before the Kerala High Court concerns the freezing of bank accounts pursuant to police requisitions. The petitioner, Sanoop K P, challenges a blanket debit freeze placed on his accounts by a bank based on a police requisition that reportedly did not specify any particular amount. The court cites its earlier decision in Dr. Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India (2024 (1) KLT 826), which directed banks and police authorities to avoid indefinite, blanket freezes and to balance investigative needs with the rights of account holders. The present matter is distinguished by the absence of a fixed sum in the requisition, which prompted the court to re-emphasize a measured approach: freezes should be limited to the amount required for investigation and should not encroach upon livelihood. The court emphasizes that blanket freezes are deleterious to account holders and the banking system. Following Dr. Sajeer, the court lays down a structured framework: obtain the specific amount to be frozen, confine the freeze to that amount if stated, allow full transactions if no information is received within two months, and as an alternative, permit an extended eight-month freeze if the entire account must be frozen, with the right to approach the court again if needed.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner submits that a blanket, indefinite freeze without a specified amount violates the rights of the account holder and disrupts livelihood. Citing the court's own precedent in Dr. Sajeer (supra), the petitioner seeks proportionate action: freezes must be linked to a defined amount and timeframe. The bank and investigating authorities are urged to provide a precise sum to be frozen and to limit the freeze accordingly. If no sum is provided within a reasonable period, the petitioner argues for restoration of full account functionality, subject to future police information.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that freezing serves investigative integrity and prevents tampering with assets. They argue that requisitions often lack full details, necessitating a protective freeze to preserve the corpus. They emphasize that blanket freezes without a specific amount could impede investigations and the broader financial system, and that courts should uphold a framework enabling the police to extract necessary leverage while ensuring channelled, time-bound constraints.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Dr. Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of India2024 (1) KLT 826PositiveThe judgment repeatedly relies on and adopts the principles from Dr. Sajeer to guide the proportional, time-bound freezing of bank accounts and to avoid blanket, indefinite freezes.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Sanoop K P v Union of India & others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ## `PETITIONER:` ``` SANOOP K P, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O CHANDRAN K P, KOOTTUMOOCHIPARAMBIL, KANJIRATTUKUNNU, THURAKKAL, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 676121. ``` ``` BY ADVS. T.S.SARATH MANU RAMACHANDRAN M.KIRANLAL R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SAMEER M NAIR JOTHISHA K.A. SAILAKSHMI MENON AASHI K. SHAJAN SMT.AKHILA B. ATUL VINAYAK P.S. ``` ## `RESPONDENTS:` ``` 1UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME SECRETARY HM@MHA.GOV.IN, PIN – 110001. ``` ``` 2NATIONAL CYBER CRIME REPORTING PORTAL REPRESENTED BY ITS NODAL CYBER CELL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CID, 4TH FLOOR, POLICE BHAVAN, SECTOR - 18, GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT CC-CID@GUJARAT.GOV.IN, PIN – 382018. ``` ``` 3NATIONAL CYBER CRIME REPORTING PORTAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS NODAL CYBER CELL OFFICER, WORLD TRADE CENTRE, CENTRE - 1, BUILDING 32ND FLOOR, CUFFEE PARADE, MUMBAI CONTROL.CPAW-MAH@GOV.IN, PIN – 400005. ``` ``` 4NATIONAL CYBER CRIME REPORTING PORTAL REPRESENTED BY ITS NODAL CYBER CELL OFFICER, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, LALKOTHI, JAIPUR CCPS-RAJ@NIC.IN, ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -2- ``` ``` PIN – 302015. ``` - `5 INDIAN CYBERCRIME COORDINATION CENTRE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 5TH FLOOR, NDCC-II BUILDING, JAI SINGH ROAD, NEW DELHI CYBERDOST@MHA.GOV.IN, PIN – 110001.` - `6 STATE OF GUJARAT, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, 5TH FLOOR, BLOCK NO. 1, SARDAR BHAVAN SACHIVALAYA, GANDHINAGAR, GUJURAT CHIEFSECRETARY@GUJURAT.GOV.IN, PIN – 382010.` - `7 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, CHIEF SECRETARY OFFICE, HUTATMA RAJGURU CHOWK, MADAME CAMA ROAD, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI DSCS@MAHARASHTRA.GOV.IN, PIN – 400032.` - `8 STATE OF RAJASTHAN REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, JAIPUR CSRAJ@RAJASTHAN.GOV.IN, PIN – 302005.` - `9 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GUJARAT STATE POLICE BHAVAN, GANDHINAGAR SECTOR 18, GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT DGP-GS@GUJARAT.GOV.IN, PIN – 382021` - `10 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, OLD COUNCIL HALL, SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH MARG, MUMBAI -1, MAHARASHTRA DGPMS.MUMBAI@MAHAPOLICE.GOV.IN, PIN – 400001` - `11 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, J-9, JHALANA INSTITUTIONAL AREA, JHALANA DOONGARI, JAIPUR DGP-RAJ@NIC.IN, PIN – 302004` - `12 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CYBER CRIME CELL, 7TH FLOOR, BLOCK - 2, KARMYOGI BHAVAN, SECTOR-10 A, GANDHINAGAR,` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -3- ``` ``` GUJARAT HELPLINE-CYBER-CID@GUJARAT.GOV, PIN – 382018. ``` ``` 13STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TULINJ POLICE STATION, CENTRAL PARK, NALLASOPARA EAST, VASAI VIRAR, MAHARASHTRA PI.TULINJ.MB-VV@MAHAPOLICE.GOV.IN, PIN – 401209. ``` ``` 14STATION HOUSE OFFICER JAIPUR POLICE STATION, OPPOSITE RAILWAY STATION, BARODIA SCHEME, GOBALBARI, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN PSCYBERSPLCRIME.JPR@GOV.IN, PIN – 302016. ``` - `15 THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA` ``` REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, RBI, BAKERY JUNCTION, NANDAVANAM, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA ``` ``` CMS.BOTRIVANDRUM@RBI.ORG.IN, PIN – 695033. ``` ``` 16PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK KOOTHRAT TOWERS, COURT ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER BO4311@PNB.CO.IN, PIN – 676121. ``` - `17 SOUTH INDIAN BANK` ``` GROUND FLOOR, K N TOWER, NILAMBUR ROAD, JASEELA JUNCTION, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER BR0047@SIB.CO.IN, PIN – 676121. ``` - `18 CANARA BANK` ``` 187/2 - 12, ATHIMANNIL COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, COURT ROAD, MANJERI REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER CB0855@CANARABANK.COM, PIN – 676121. ``` ``` BY ADV P.A.AUGUSTINE SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH, SC SRI.S.MANU, DSGI, SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC SRI.SUNIL SHANKER, SC ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -4- ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -5- ``` ## `JUDGMENT` ``` In matters relating to the freezing of accounts, this Court has already delivered a judgment inDr.Sajeer v. Reserve Bank of ``` ``` India [2024 (1) KLT 826]. ``` ``` 2.In the aforesaid judgment, certain ``` ``` directions were issued to the respective ``` ``` Banks, as also the Police Authorities, to ``` ``` continue the freeze for a certain period of time and only to the extent which was ``` ``` requisitioned by the Police. ``` ``` 3.However, what makes this case ``` ``` different from the one that was considered by ``` ``` this Court in the aforesaid judgment, is that the requisitions received by the Bank are ``` ``` stated to contain no particular amount, but seek a complete and blanket debit freeze of ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024` ``` -6- ``` ``` all the amounts in credit therein. ``` ``` 4.The legal issues and the imperatives involved have already been discussed by this Court in Dr.Sajeer(supra). A blanket freeze indefinitely, and without any period of time being stipulated by the Police, is certainly deleterious, not only to the account holders but also to the system as a whole; and the view in this regard of this Court is clearly ``` ``` reflected in Dr.Sajeer (supra). ``` ``` 5.However, since the Bank is now ``` ``` incapacitated from allowing the operation of the account of the petitioner because the ``` ``` requisition issued to them do not contain any particular amount, I am certain that this ``` ``` Court is enjoined to deal with this matter, sufficientlyprotectingboththe ``` ``` investigation, as also the account holders. I ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024` ``` -7- ``` ``` am persuaded to such course because, the blanket freeze of an account, if it is not imperatively necessary, will be an affront to the rights of the account holders and ``` ``` impinges even their right to livelihood, ``` ``` since, in this era, everyone relies upon ``` ``` banking transactions as the primary source. ``` ``` In the afore circumstances, following ``` ``` Dr.Sajeer(supra), I dispose of this writ ``` ``` petition with the following directions: ``` ``` (a) The respondent Bank is directed to ``` ``` immediately issue a request to the Investigation Authority/Police Authority and ``` ``` seek the amount which is required to be kept ``` ``` in freeze or held in lien in the account of the petitioner. This shall be done by the Bank within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024` ``` -8- ``` ``` (b) In the event that the Investigating Officer/Police Authority responds to the afore requisition and mentions a particular amount, as being the sum that is required to be kept frozen or held in lien, then the ``` ``` respondent Bank will confine the freeze/lien ``` ``` to such an extent and allow the petitioner/account holder to deal with his account and transact therein beyond that limit. ``` ``` (c) On the contrary, if no information is ``` ``` receivedfromthePolice ``` ``` Authority/Investigating officer within a ``` ``` period of two months from the date on which the afore requisition was made by the respondent Bank, then they will allow the petitioner/account holder to transact fully in his account, notwithstanding the debit ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024` ``` -9- ``` ``` freeze requisition, subject to any further ``` ``` information to be received from the Police ``` ``` Authority/Investigating Officer in future. ``` - `(d) As an alternative, if the response` ``` from the Police Authority/Investigating ``` ``` Officer is that the entire account be frozen for any reason that is mentioned therein, thentheBankwillinformthe ``` ``` petitioner/account holder accordingly and ``` ``` continue the freeze in such a manner for a ``` ``` further period of eight months thereafter. ``` ``` (e)If, after a period of eight months, ``` ``` the requisition made by the Police ``` ``` Authorities - either to a particular sum or ``` ``` the full amount in the account of the account holder - is not withdrawn, then the ``` ``` petitioner/account holder will be at full liberty to approach this Court again; for ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -10- which purpose, all contentions in this writ petition are reserved to him to be impelled in future. ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ``` DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN ``` ``` JUDGE ``` ``` akv ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8636 OF 2024 ``` ``` -11- ``` ## `APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8636/2024` ## `PETITIONER EXHIBITS` ``` EXHIBIT P1 ``` - `A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DETAILS RECEIVED FROM THE 12TH RESPONDENT DATED 09-05-2023 STATING, THAT THE PETITIONER IS A SUSPECT IN AN ONLINE TRANSACTION` - `EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL SENT BY THE 17TH RESPONDENT BANK DATED 15-11-2023 STATING, THAT THE PETITIONER IS A SUSPECT IN AN ONLINE TRANSACTION` - `EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THE 18TH RESPONDENT BANK DATED 29-01-2024 STATING, THAT THE PETITIONER IS A SUSPECT IN AN ONLINE TRANSACTION` - `EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF TRANSACTION DETAILS DATED 30.01.2024 MADE FROM THE PETITIONER'S BANK ACCOUNT IN PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT` - `EXHIBIT P4(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF TRANSACTION DETAILS FROM 19.09.2023 TO 02.02.2024 MADE FROM THE PETITIONER'S BANK ACCOUNT IN SOUTH INDIAN BANK, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT` - `EXHIBIT P4(B)` - `A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF TRANSACTION DETAILS DATED 03.02.2024 MADE FROM THE PETITIONER'S BANK ACCOUNT IN CANARA BANK, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT`