Manash Kumar & ANR. v. Union Of India & ORS.

$~97 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 7939/2026 MANASH KUMAR & ANR.

.....Petitioners Through: Appearance not given.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Vikrant Nilesh Goyal, Mr.

Jashwant Rai Agarwal, Mr. Yash Basoya, Mr.

Inderpreet Singh, Advs. for R1 Mr. Akshit Kapur, Adv for R3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 29.05.2026 CM APPL. 38227/2026 Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

CM APPL. 38226/2026 1.

This is an application filed under Section 151 of the CPC, 1908, on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following prayers:- "a) Direct Respondent No. 3 to forthwith remove the freeze and forthwith release the subject bank account of the Petitioner, without any further restrictions; or b) Direct Respondent No. 3 to forthwith permit the Petitioner to operate the subject bank account, subject to a lien of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only); . . ." 2.

For the reasons stated in the application, issue notice. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3.

Mr. Goyal and Mr. Kapur, learned counsels accept notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 respectively.

4.

There is nobody appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2, however, in view of urgency the matter is being taken up for hearing. 5.

Mr. Kapur, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, on instructions states that as per the information available with the respondent No. 3 bank, the Cyber Crime Police Station has directed a lien to be placed on Rs. 5000/- only.

6.

The petitioner No. 2 namely MK Impex is a sole proprietorship concern of the petitioner No. 1. Both of them are referred as petitioner interchangeably hereinafter for the purpose of this Order. 7.

It is only on the basis of this disputed amount of Rs. 5000/- that the entire bank account of the petitioner has been freezed. 8.

I am satisfied that the petitioner has a prima facie case as placing a blanket lien/freezing of entire bank account or entire banking activity in present case, of an individual or a business entity is an action entailing serious consequences creating severe hardships and also affecting the financial wellbeing of an individual or the enterprise. 9.

I am of the view that the freezing of the account of the petitioner in its entirety putting the entire banking operations to a complete halt cannot be allowed when the dispute is only with regards to a portion/part of the account balance, the undisputed effective account balance cannot be freezed. Thus, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the petitioner.

10. For the said reasons, the respondent No. 3 bank is directed to mark a lien only to the extent of Rs. 5000/- on the current bank account The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

bearing No. 43971981103.

11. Subject to the lien of Rs. 5000/-, the said bank account shall be made operational for all banking activities.

12. The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. W.P.(C) 7939/2026

13. In view of the order passed, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition.

14. Subject to a lien of Rs. 5000/-, the petitioner No. 1shall be permitted to operate the bank account of his sole proprietorship concern i.e., the petitioner No. 2.

15. The present writ petition is disposed of. JASMEET SINGH, J MAY 29, 2026 / (MS) The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.