Karnataka High Court
WP/15397/2026 of RAJENDRA SINGH RAJPUROHIT Vs KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK on 15 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010339852026 NC: 2026:KHC:50284 WP No. 15397 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 15397 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: RAJENDRA SINGH RAJPUROHIT S/O MADANSING
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 15397 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
RAJENDRA SINGH RAJPUROHIT
S/O MADANSING RAJPUROHIT,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.48/5, 3RD FLOOR,
5TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS,
CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE,
KARNATAKA-560018.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KEERTHI KRISHNA REDDY.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
NO.10-7, UMIYA LANDMARK,
LAVELLE ROAD, NEXT TO CHANCERY,
BANGALORE, KARNATAKA-560001
2.
GOMITPUR POLICE STATION
AHMEDABAD POLICE INSPECTOR(D VRANA),
AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT-380021
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SREEDEVI K B, ADVOCATE FOR R1
SRI. PANINI A H, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR
HC-KAR
DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 MAHINDRA
KOTAK BANK FORTHWITH DEFREEZE THE PETITIONERS
ACCOUNTSSAVINGS
ACCOUNT
NO.8513422029
AND
TO
PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO OPERATE AND UTILIZE THE
FUNDS
THEREIN,
SUBJECT
ONLY
TO
MARKING
AND
MAINTAINING LIEN TO THE EXTENT OF THE SPECIFIC
AMOUNTS, IF ANY, THAT ARE DEMONSTRABLY TRACEABLE AS
ALLEGED CRIME PROCEEDS IN THE CONCERNED NATIONAL
CYBER CRIME REPORTING PORTAL COMPLAINT(S) /FIR(S).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
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.
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent No.1 -Kotak Mahindra Bank forthwith defreeze the petitioner's Bank accounts savings account No.85134220299 and to permit the petitioner to operate and utilize the funds therein, subject only to marking and maintaining lien to the extent of the specific amounts, if any, that are demonstrably traceable as alleged crime proceeds in the concerned National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal complaint(s)/FIR(s).
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate direction to respondent No.2 - investigating agency to consider the decide, within a time - bound period, a detailed representation that the petitioner proposes to submit who was unaware of any fraudulent transaction and to communicate to respondents No.1 the precise quantum, if any, of funds required to be retained under lien as alleged crime proceeds, that
HC-KAR
the banks may confine the lien only to that amount and release the balance.
c) Pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity, including any further or consequential directions required to ensure that the petitioner's right to meet his day to day financial obligations is not frustrated by disproportionate and procedurally defective freezing the petitioner's bank accounts circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the interim order dated 19.05.2026 the lien for a sum of Rs.7,088.82/- has been marked and the petitioner is able to operate the Bank account beyond the said lien marked amount of Rs.7,088.82/-.
3. In view of the aforementioned, no further orders are to be passed in the present writ petition.
4. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that reason for marking of the lien has not been disclosed by respondent No.1.
5. The petitioner is permitted to submit a representation to respondent No.1 as well as to the concerned authority - respondent No.2 with regard to marking of the lien
HC-KAR
as noticed above. Upon such representation, the same shall be considered and intimation of such consideration shall be made to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in any event not later than two weeks from the date of the said representation.
6. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforementioned terms.
(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
PNV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 65