Kumar Siddharth v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.558 of 2025 ====================================================== Kumar Siddharth S/o Ranjeet Kumar Sinha, R/o 202, Sanghmitra Apartment, Road-6/C, Near Maila Tanki, Rajendra Nagar, Patna, Bihar-800016. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

2.

Chief Executive Officer, Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Center (14C), 5th Floor, NDCC-II Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi. 3.

State Bank of India through its Chairman, Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400002.

4.

Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Rajendra Nagar Branch, IFSCSBIN0001662, Rajendra Nagar, Patna, Bihar-800016. 5.

General Manager, Local Head Office, State Bank of India, Chennai, 10, College Road, Thousand Lights, Chennai, Tamil Nadu-600006. 6.

Superintendent of Police, Madurai City, Chennai, Tamil Nadu. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.

For SBI :

Mr. Apurv Harsh, Adv.

:

Mr. Manu Tripurari, Adv.

:

Ms. Jaya Singh, Adv.

For UOI :

Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Sr. Adv.

:

Mr. Shivaditya Dhari Singh, Sr. Panel Counsel For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Additional Solicitor General ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s):- "i. For the issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in the nature of certiorari to hold that the hold put on by the Respondent authorities on the amount of Rs. 60,000/-from available credit balance in Petitioner's Savings Account maintained at Rajendra Nagar Branch of Respondent Bank is without any authority of law, wrong, illegal and consequently, direct the Respondent Bank to

2/4 withdraw the said hold/ free the said amount. ii. For the issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in the nature of certiorari to direct the respondent bank to release the aforesaid amount meanwhile the present case is pending.

iii. For the issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in the nature of certiorari to direct the Respondent Bank and Respondent Authority to pay compensation of amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the Petitioner for the physical and mental harassment caused to him by the aforesaid wrong, illegal, irresponsible and reckless act and the also for the expenses including litigation expenses he had to bear for recovering the aforesaid amount put on hold.

iv. For granting any other relief/reliefs to the Petitioner in order to do complete justice in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondentBank has put on hold an amount of Rs. 60,000/- which is lying in the Savings Account No. 20013888763 IFSC- SBIN0001662 of the petitioner solely on the basis of E-mail received from the State Bank of India, Chennai Branch.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the authority has put on hold the amount without any legal basis and there is absolutely no involvement of the petitioner in any of the cyber crime. Further, it is stated that the details of the crime has not been shared with the petitioner and simply on the basis of the E-mail received from the Cyber Cell Division of the Chennai City, the authority has put on hold an amount of Rs.

3/4 60,000/- lying in the savings bank account of the petitioner. Learned counsel has further stated that the respondent authority has till date not communicated anything related to the progress of the cyber crime which obviously has been registered in the year 2024. Learned counsel has stated that hold on the above amount of Rs. 60,000/- may be removed and the petitioner may be permitted to operate the account.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Bank has stated that based on the complaint which has been registered in respect of a cyber crime and the petitioner being one of the recipients of the amounts which was involved in the said crime, the authorities have received a letter from the Chennai Branch of the State Bank of India to put on hold an amount of Rs. 60,000/- lying in the saving bank account of the petitioner. Learned counsel has stated that in case the petitioner is so desirous, he can give an indemnity bond indemnifying the respondent-Bank from any future action and also make good the amount of Rs. 60,000/- in case any adverse orders are passed by any competent Court or any direction is received from the Cyber Police of State of Tamil Nadu.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions

4/4 states that the petitioner is willing to give a notarized affidavit indemnifying the Bank of any legal action and also make good the amount of Rs. 60,000/-, if any adverse orders are passed directing the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 60,000/- by any competent Court or any direction is issued by the Cyber Police of State of Tamil Nadu.

7. Having regard to the above mentioned facts and circumstances and also the submissions made by both the counsel, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to file an affidavit duly notarized indemnifying the Bank of any legal action and also make good an amount of Rs. 60,000/- if any adverse orders are passed by any competent Court or any direction is issued by the Cyber Police of State of Tamil Nadu. On such filing of notarized affidavit by the petitioner, the Bank shall remove the hold on the amount of Rs. 60,000/- lying in the savings bank account of the petitioner.

8. With the above direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

(A. Abhishek Reddy, J) Ayush/- U