Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ROHIT SAHEBRAO SHEGARversusYES BANK LTD AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition was dismissed as moot because the account had already been defrozen.

Summary

The petitioner, Rohit Sahebrao Shegar, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 106 of 2026 seeking a court order to defreeze his bank account held with Yes Bank Ltd. The petitioner alleged that the account remained frozen despite his request. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the bank had already defrozen the account. The court noted that, in view of the account being defrozen, there was no longer any relief to be granted. Consequently, the court held that the petition had become moot and ordered its disposal.

Issues considered

  • What relief, if any, remains for the petitioner after the bank has defrozen the account?

Subjects

  • defreezing
  • bank account freeze
  • criminal writ petition
  • petition disposed
  • mootness

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:44067-DB

                                                      941 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 106 OF 2026




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        941 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 106 OF 2026

                                     Rohit Sahebrao Shegar
                                              Versus
                                    Yes Bank Ltd. And Others
                   __________________________________________________________
                     • Adv. Amol A. Pawar h/f. Adv. B. Shwetambari R. for
                        the Petitioner
                     • Mr. N. B. Patil, A.P.P. for State
                     • Adv. Yadnik Bolkar h/f. Adv. Suresh W. Munde for
                        Respondent No. 1
                     • Adv. Ms. Bharaswadkar Patil Kalpalata, Senior
                        Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 5 - Income Tax
                        Department
                   __________________________________________________________

                                     CORAM    : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
                                                VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
                                     DATE     : SEPTEMBER 23, 2026

                   PER COURT :

                   1)             Learned   counsel    for     the      petitioner,         on

                   instructions, submits that though the petition was filed for

                   defreezing the account of the petitioner, the concerned

                   bank has already defreezed the account of the petitioner.

                   2)             In view of the same, nothing survives in the

                   present criminal writ petition and the same stands

                   disposed of.



                   (VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV)            (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
                             JUDGE                            JUDGE

                   Komal Kamble                                                   Page| 1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.