WP/34620/2024 of MR M J RAGHAVENDRA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 8 September 2026

ORAL ORDER

The present petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs: "WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above the petitioner in the above case most respectfully prays this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the Annexure -A, Letter dated 20/09/02024 and Annexure -B Letter dated 27/09/2024 issued by the respondent No.1 police to freeze the account No.

HC-KAR

110201081904 of the petitioner at Canara Bank, Basaveshwaranagara Branch, Bengaluru."

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that pursuant to the letter dated 27.09.2024 issued by the first respondent - police authorities, the bank account of the petitioner with respondent Nos.2 and 3 - bank was frozen and the petitioner could not operate the said bank account.

3. This Court, by order dated 20.12.2024 directed the third respondent - bank to defreeze the account of the petitioner and permit the petitioner to operate the account subject to the petitioner furnishing indemnity for a sum of Rs.47.00 lakhs.

4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that consequent to the said order dated 20.12.2024, the petitioner has furnished an indemnity and has operated the bank account in terms of the order dated 20.12.2024. Subsequently, pursuant to IA.No.1/2024 filed by the fourth respondent, this Court ordered as under: Learned Counsel for respondent No.4 has filed I.A.No.1/2024 along with a copy of the sale deed dated 19.09.2024 and copy of the Bank Account Statement.

HC-KAR

Learned Counsel submits that the petitioner is a Commission Agent and he was only entitled for receipt of the Commission amount of Rs.1.00 Lakh. In that regard, the petitioner has misused the blank cheque given by respondent No.4 and has got a sum of Rs.47.00 Lakhs transferred from the Account of respondent No.4 by misusing the blank cheque. It is further submitted that respondent No.4 has already filed a criminal case against the petitioner herein and the matter is being considered by the jurisdictional Magistrate. Learned Counsel would therefore submit that the petitioner should not be permitted to operate the Bank Account, more particularly, the balance amount which is remaining in the Account of the petitioner after he has transferred a sum of Rs.11,50,000/-.

Having regard to the allegations made by respondent No.4 and the fact that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner before the jurisdictional Magistrate, the submission made by respondent No.4 should be accepted and appropriate orders are required to be passed at this stage.

Although objections are permitted to be filed by the petitioner to I.A.No.1/2024 filed at the hands of respondent No.4, nevertheless, respondent No.2-Bank Manager, Canara Bank, is hereby directed not to permit the petitioner to transfer or encash any further amount from out of what is remaining in the Account in respect of Rs.47.00 Lakhs, which were transferred from the Account of respondent No.4 to the petitioner, until further orders are passed.

A week’s time is granted to the petitioner to file objections to I.A.No.1/2024 and to comply with the office objections."

5. It is forthcoming that pending consideration of IA.No.1/2024, this Court directed the bank authorities not to permit the petitioner to transfer or encash any further amount

HC-KAR

from what is remaining in the account in respect of Rs.47.00 lakhs, which was transferred from the bank account of the fourth respondent to the bank account of the petitioner.

6. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the fourth respondent that the sum of Rs.47.00 lakhs was transferred by the petitioner from the account of the fourth respondent and the said sum was ordered to be frozen by the police authorities consequent to the criminal proceedings having been initiated in Crime No.161/2024, which is pending consideration on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru. It is submitted that in the said criminal proceedings, charge sheet has been filed and trial is to be undertaken.

7. Admittedly, as on date, there are no orders that have been passed either in the criminal proceedings or in any other proceedings initiated by the fourth respondent to secure any amount standing in the account of the petitioner held in respondent Nos.2 and 3 - bank.

HC-KAR

8. Although the contention putforth on behalf of the fourth respondent is that the petitioner has misused the sum of Rs.47.00 lakhs by wrongfully withdrawing the same and transferring the said amount from the account of the fourth respondent to the bank account of the petitioner held in respondent Nos.2 and 3 - bank, as on date, there is no order, wherein any amount standing in the account of the petitioner in account No.110201081904 at Canara Bank, Basaveshwaranagar Branch, has been attached. In the absence of any attachment being made, in respect of the amounts in the bank account standing in the name of the petitioner, there is no impediment for the petitioner to utilize the said amounts.

9. Accordingly, the letter dated 20.09.2024 (Annexure- A to the writ petition) and the letter dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure-B to the writ petition) issued by the first respondent to the Canara Bank, Hebbal Branch, are hereby quashed.

10. This order will not preclude the concerned authorities from attaching any amounts that are available in the bank accounts of the petitioner in appropriate proceedings.

HC-KAR

11. This order will also not come in the way of the fourth respondent instituting appropriate proceedings for recovery of any amount that may be due from the petitioner to the fourth respondent.

12. All rights and contentions of the parties in that regard are kept open to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings.

13. The writ petition is accordingly partly allowed in the aforementioned terms.

14. Pending IAs., if any, stand disposed of.

(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

ND List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59