Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/5287/2026 of NEETU KOTHARI Vs THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER OF H D F C BANK on 14 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44598 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5287 of 2026 1 - Neetu Kothari D/o Devkishan Kothari Aged About 32 Years R/o 382 Baba Ramd Ward, Ward 9 Bemetara, District -Bemetara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Through Branch Manager Of H D F C Bank R/o -H D F C
CGHC010409942026
2026:CGHC:44598
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5287 of 2026
1 - Neetu Kothari D/o Devkishan Kothari Aged About 32 Years R/o 382 Baba Ramd Ward, Ward 9 Bemetara, District -Bemetara (C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
1 - Through Branch Manager Of H D F C Bank R/o -H D F C Bank Ltd, GRD
FLR And 1st FLR ,khasra No. 1212/69, Raipur Road Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) (Cause Title As Per Annexure P/ 1)
... Respondent
For Petitioner
:
Mr. Parth Kumar Jha, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice
Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
15/10/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and direct the concerned respondent bank to unblock the HDFC Bank A/c No. 50100232611532 of the petitioner immediately, in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner is a woman who opened a bank account with HDFC Bank, Branch Bemetara, on 01.09.2018. It is stated that the said bank account was subsequently blocked by the respondent without any information or assigning any reason. Hence, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent as arbitrary, mala fide and contrary to law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bank account of the petitioner has been freezed by the concerned Bank without assigning any reason. He further submits that the petitioner has approached the Bank authorities; however, no reason has been communicated to her. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking defreezing of the petitioner’s bank account.
4. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the documents available on record, this Court finds that there is nothing on record to indicate the reasons for freezing the petitioner’s bank account. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to submit an appropriate application before the concerned Bank authorities within 15 working days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In turn, the concerned Bank authorities are under an obligation to communicate the reasons for freezing the petitioner’s bank account by passing a reasoned order within a week from the date of receipt of such application.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Priyanka