Selva Shalini v. The State Of Haryana Rep. By The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 24/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI Selva Shalini ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Haryana Rep. By, The Sub Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Gurugram, Haryana.

2. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank Mangudi Branch, Virudhunagar District.

... Respondents PRAYER :- To issue a Writ of Mandamus direct the 2nd respondent to de-freeze the petitioner's primary Current Bank A/c no. 7957174468 of the Indian Bank, Mangudi Branch, Virudhunagar, 176, Ramamurthy road, Virudhunagar, Tamil nadu forthwith and allow me to operate the account regularly without any hindrance.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr. S Harish, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.D.Rajaboopathy - for R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.C.Karthick for R2 Standing Counsel

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus direct the 2nd respondent to de-freeze the petitioner's primary Current Bank A/c no. 7957174468 of the Indian Bank, Mangudi Branch, Virudhunagar, 176, Ramamurthy road, Virudhunagar, Tamil nadu forthwith and allow me to operate the account regularly without any hindrance.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the petition are as follows: (a) The petitioner is holding a current account bearing A/c No. 7957174468 at Indian Bank, Mangudi Branch, Virudhunagar. (b) The petitioner came to know that his account had been frozen. 2/6

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not an accused in any criminal case; the act of the second respondent freezing the entire account is illegal and violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner; that the second respondent was obliged to obey the directions, the second respondent ought to have informed the petitioner about the action taken thereon; and that having failed to do so, it has breached the contract with the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent would submit that the account of the petitioner was frozen due to some illegal transactions.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either sides and carefully perused the materials placed before this Court.

6. On perusal of the records, the fact is that the account has been frozen and the petitioner is unable to operate the account. 3/6

7. It is seen that in similar circumstances, this Court had observed that when the alleged fraudulent amount is quantified, the freezing of the whole account would not be justified. Similar view was taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.15684 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024, wherein, it was held that:

"3. The respondent is permitted to retain the aforesaid sum by marking lien on the petitioner's account. Subject to such marking of lien, the petitioner is permitted to operate their bank account. The freezing effected on the petitioner's bank account is lifted to the aforesaid extent. T\his writ petition stands allowed . No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed."

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of on the following directions:

(a). The first respondent / Bank shall mark a lien only for the quantified sum and permit the petitioner to operate the account forthwith. 4/6

(b). The petitioner is at liberty to move to the concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate for recall of the lien marked over the quantified amount, if he is so advised.

24.06.2026 NCC : yes / no Index : yes / no Note : Issue order copy on 01.07.2026 pnn To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Gurugram, Haryana.

2. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank Mangudi Branch, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

L. VICTORIA GOWRI,J pnn

ORDER

IN WP CRL.(MD) No.3404 of 2026 Date : 24/06/2026 6/6