Trader's Bank Account Frozen Over ₹200 Suspicious Transaction: Delhi HC Urges Govt. To Take Steps Against Blanket Freezing

The Delhi High Court while granting relief to a trader whose bank account was frozen due to alleged suspicious transaction of ₹200 has urged the Ministry of Home Affairs to take proactive steps to deal with issue of blanket freezing of the accounts.

The Court was considering a Petition filed by a Company aggrieved of the manner in which its account were frozen by Respondent.

The single-bench of Justice Manoj Jain observed, "In light of the frequent filing of such matters concerning blanket freezing of the accounts, this Court feels that Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India should take proactive steps to address the same. It may consider consulting all concerned stakeholders, including respective States/UTs and then, with consensus of everyone, to chalk-out a uniform policy, standard operating procedures and guidelines to ensure that such matters are handled with requisite consideration and compassion. The aim should be to balance the rights of a complainant in any such criminal investigation vis-a-vis the right of innocent and unwary accountholder, made to face unwarranted hardship on account of blanket freezing of account, despite being completely innocent and unaware of commission of any crime."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Preetam Singh while the Respondent was represented by CGSC Premtosh K. Mishra.

Counsel for Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is left with not much of the grievance and is no longer interested in pursuing with the present petition. Though liberty was sought to take appropriate action as permissible under law qua prayer.

The Court disposed off the Petition as not pressed and granted the liberty. It however went on to point out that issue raised in the present petition has been a matter of recurring concern as many such like petitions are flooding the Courts.

"It is, therefore, high time that the investigating/law enforcement agencies, in context of freezing bank accounts, act with requisite care, caution and yes, compassion as well," the Court observed.

It pointed out that there is lack of exhibiting any reason on part of the Investigating Agencies while issuing such directions to banks.

"In the present case, it is noteworthy that the petitioner’s bank account, which had a withdrawable balance of Rs. 93,50,05,208/-, was frozen due to innocuous entry of Rs. 200/- being credited therein. There is nothing to suggest that petitioner is suspect or accused of any cyber-crime. The petitioner, quite possibly, may not even be connected with the offence under investigation and might be unintended beneficiary. In such types of cyber-crimes, if any fraudster cheats a complainant and with the help of cheated money, when such fraudster buys something using such money, the police, chasing such money-trail, directs freezing the bank accounts of all concerned and in the process, many innocent recipients have to bear the brunt, for no fault of theirs," the Court observed.

The Court stressed that justification for freezing any particular bank account must be given.

"Such discretion vests with investigating agency, its better left to them to decide as to when such blanket freezing needs to be ordered. However, once it chooses to do so, it must offer some justification. Such blanket measure, if taken recourse to, without offering any reason, can certainly play havoc with the financial concerns of such account holders. In relation to small-time vendors, it can disrupt prospects of their mere existence, even. It is not difficult to imagine that any such action can put their lives in a complete disarray," the Court observed.

It noted that possibility of marking a lien on disputed amount, whenever it is identifiable, should be explored as a more appropriate interim measure and ideally, it should be the first and foremost option.

"This would, naturally, mitigate the undue hardship being caused on account of blanket freezing of account and would also ensure that the alleged cheated money remains secured and intact," the Court added.

Cause Title: Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union Of India & Ors. (2025: DHC: 1214)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Preetam Singh,

Respondent- CGSC Premtosh K. Mishra, Advocate Manish Vashist, Advocate Sanya Kalsi, Government Pleader Gokul Sharma, Advocate Ritika Sisodiya, Advocate Ramesh Babu, Advocate Tanya Choudhary, Advocate Rohan Srivastava

Click here to read/ download Order