J J Imprints Pvt Ltd Through Sarwan Jain v. State Bank Of India Through Branch Manager
$~4 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13225/2024 J J IMPRINTS PVT LTD THROUGH SARWAN JAIN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr Ashwani Kumar Singla, Adv versus STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Rajiv Kapur, SC for SBI along with Mr. Akshit Kapur, AoR and Ms. Riya Sood, Adv
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
O R D E R
% 30.01.2026 1.
This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:
"i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction to the State Bank of India to reverse the entry i.e. repay in the account from which it was received the amount (the petitioner is ready to execute indemnity if so required). ii) For issuance of interim orders to transfer the funds to an interest bearing time deposit of 2 years."
2.
The facts are that the petitioner was to pay a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs to M/s Vardhman Agencies on account of business dealings. However, the petitioner paid the amount online and erroneously credited the amount in the account of Jagdamba Trading Company/TWICLO Tours & Packages maintained with SBI, G.T. Karnal Road, branch New Delhi, on 17.02.2023. 3.
On 17.02.2023, the petitioner immediately realized the mistake and informed the respondent bank through an email and a complaint was lodged The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
with Indian Cyber Crime Coordination centre.
4.
The petitioner on 20.02.2023 paid an amount of Rs. 15 lakhs to M/s Vardhman Agencies. The petitioner also informed its bank, i.e., Axis Bank to take steps for reversal of the earlier transaction. 5.
The Axis Bank took up the same with the respondent bank but since there was a complaint received by the respondent bank from the Indian Cyber Crime Co-ordination Centre, the amount was not returned by the respondent. Hence the present petition.
6.
In the present case, admittedly, the amount belongs to the petitioner and was wrongly credited in the account of Jagdamba Trading Company/TWICLO Tours & Packages.
7.
It is also an admitted fact that there is no FIR against the petitioner for any criminal actions, or that the petitioner has been declared a fraud or that the account of the petitioner is put on freeze by any authority. 8.
The petitioner is only seeking return of his amount which was wrongly credited to the account of Jagdamba Trading Company/TWICLO Tours & Packages.
9.
Mr. Singla, learned counsel for the petitioner, further states that the petitioner is ready and willing to execute an indemnity bond in favour of the respondent bank, undertaking to make good any loss/demand made by any competent Court against the petitioner.
10.
Mr. Kapur, learned standing counsel for the respondent, states that the account of the petitioner is a mule account.
11.
However, be that as it may, the amount belongs to the petitioner and has been wrongly transferred to the account of Jagdamba Trading Company/TWICLO Tours & Packages.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
12.
For the said reasons, I am inclined to allow the petition. 13.
The petitioner has inadvertently transferred the amount of Rs. 15 lakhs to M/s Jagdamba Trading Company/TWICLO Tours & Packages which needs to be returned, subject to the petitioner giving an indemnity bond in favour of the respondent bank for a period of 3 years to make good any loss or demand made upon the petitioner in this regard. On giving the indemnity, the amount of Rs. 15 lakhs shall be returned to the petitioner's account within 10 days of the date of uploading of this Order. 14.
The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid directions. JASMEET SINGH, J JANUARY 30, 2026/AS The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.