Manish Chaudhary v. State Of Telangana & ANR.

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4421/2025 MANISH CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Ramvir Singh, Adv.

versus STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Santosh Kumar Rout SC for SBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 15.04.2026 1.

The petition is for directions to respondent no. 1 to remove the lien marked against a sum of Rs. 1,78,000/- on the bank account of the petitioner, bearing no. 51104416399 at the respondent no. 2-bank. 2.

As per the petitioner, the impugned action is with respect to his alleged link with F.I.R. No. 10/2024 registered by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Telangana Cyber Security Bureau.

3.

The stand taken by the bank is that the lien has been marked on the petitioner's account pursuant to official instructions received from respondent no. 1-State.

4.

The matter has remained pending since 2025 and was taken up for consideration on various dates. On 12.01.2026, the Court had directed that notice be served on respondent no. 1. The office noting for 15.04.2026 indicates that notice has been served. However, there is no justification offered on behalf of respondent no.1 for the impugned action. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/04/2026 at 12:44:04

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that till date, he has not received any summons from any of Courts with respect to the aforesaid F.I.R. Further, he submits that, there is no investigation pending against the petitioner.

6.

For all those reasons, the Court finds that there should not be continued marking of lien against the petitioner's account to which, he is legally entitled to operate without any fetter. 7.

This Court in the Malabar Gold and Diamond Limited & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.,1 has held as under:

"19. In light of these provisions, it is also pertinent to note that any blanket or disproportionate freezing of bank accounts, particularly where the account holder is neither an accused nor even a suspect in the offence under investigation, is manifestly arbitrary, and in the teeth of the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) and 21 and of the Constitution of India, which encompass the right to livelihood and freedom to carry on trade and business. Such indiscriminate debit freezing, without any finding of complicity, has the inevitable effect of paralysing the day-today business operations of an otherwise innocent entity, resulting in loss of commercial goodwill and financial consequences, thereby subjecting a non-complicit account holder to punitive consequences." 8.

The petition is, therefore, disposed of with direction to the bank to immediately lift the lien in question.

9.

Respondent no.1, however, shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law and if the petitioner's complicity is found subsequently, the necessary action shall be taken. 10.

With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J APRIL 15, 2026/P 1 Order dated 16.01.2026 in W.P.(C) 4198/2025. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/04/2026 at 12:44:04