Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/6475/2025 of RAMESH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS on 18 June 2026
GAHC010252672025 2026:GAU-AS:8905 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6475/2025 RAMESH S/O- DURAISAMY, HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AS 4/717 VADAKKALUR POST ANNUR AVINASHI TALUK VADAKKALUR COIMBATORE VADAKKALUR TAMILNADU-641653
GAHC010252672025
2026:GAU-AS:8905
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6475/2025
RAMESH
S/O- DURAISAMY, HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AS 4/717
VADAKKALUR POST ANNUR AVINASHI TALUK VADAKKALUR
COIMBATORE VADAKKALUR TAMILNADU-641653
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, HOME AND
POLITICAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
AZARA POLICE STATION
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781017.
3:THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
HOME AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL
NABANNA BUILDING
325
SARAT CHATTERJEE ROAD
SHIBPUR
HOWRAH-711102.
4:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
MALDA POLICE STATION
OLD MALDA ROAD
WEST BENGAL-732128.
5:THE STATE OF TELANGANA
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
HOME AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA
KHAIRATABAD
HYDERABAD- 500022.
6:HDFC BANK LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER
HAVING OFFICE AT SREENIVAS BAVAN
1050 AVINASHI ROAD
NEAR ANNA STATUTE
COIMBATORE
TAMIL NADU- 641018
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. Rathi, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. M. Barman, Govt. Advocate BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
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.
O R D E R
19.06.2026 Heard Mr. D. Rathi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Ms. M. Barman, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
2. The Petitioner herein is a resident of the State of Tamil Nadu. The Petitioner has a Bank Account in HDFC Bank Branch in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
3. The present proceedings have been initiated on the basis of a complaint filed in the Azara Police Station that the Petitioner’s Bank Account has been frozen. It is also seen from the very petition itself that there are various other complaints in the State of West Bengal as well as in Telangana.
4. Ms. M. Barman, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 has submitted that the Officer-in- Charge of Azara Police Station had issued a communication dated 01.12.2025 stating inter-alia that no complaint has been received and initiated by the Azara Police Station against HDFC Savings Bank Account No.12501140005656, Branch name Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and further, the complaint No.MHA33710250051394 was not initiated by the Azara Police Station or in the system of the Azara Police Station, any records are available. The said communication is kept on record and marked with the letter “X”. The contents of the said communication issued by the Officer-in-Charge of Azara Police Station are reproduced herein under:- “To The Senior Govt. Advocate, Assam Gauhati High Court, Guwahati Sub:- Submission of Report Ref:-Memo No. JR/GA/MB/2025/11113 dated 18/11/2025. With reference to the subject cited above I have the honour to report that in this reference no complaint has been received and initiated by Azara Police Station against the HDFC savings account no.12501140005656, Branch name Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and no proceeding has been initiated from our side. And complaint no.
MHA33710250051394 was not initiated by Azara police and in our system no such record is available. Regards Yours Faithfully Officer in Charge Azara Police Station Dated 01/12/2025”
5. Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) of the Constitution to entertain the instant writ petition.
6. At this stage, Mr. D. Rathi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner would be well advised to withdraw the instant writ petition and approach before the appropriate High Court.
7. Considering the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal.
8. The withdrawal of the instant writ proceedings shall not preclude or prejudice the Petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant