Allahabad High Court
UPENDRA NATH PANDEYversusState of UP
- Decided
Holding
The petition is disposed, with the petitioner permitted to file a fresh application for defreezing his bank account.
Summary
The petitioner, Upendra Nath Pandey, applied to have his bank account defrozen after it was sealed by police following an FIR under several IPC offences. The trial court dismissed the application, holding that the investigation was still pending, and the revisional court affirmed that order. The petitioner contended that the investigation had been completed, that co‑accused accounts had been defrozen, and that the lower courts' orders were illegal. The High Court observed that it had not determined whether the defreezing application was filed before or after the charge‑sheet, presumed it was filed before the supplementary charge‑sheet, and granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh application for consideration. Accordingly, the petition was disposed without setting aside the earlier orders.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court and revisional court erred in holding that the investigation was ongoing and thereby refusing to defreeze the petitioner’s bank account
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to have his bank account defrozen pending the conclusion of the investigation
- Whether the High Court can set aside the orders of the lower courts under Article 227
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379, 406, 411, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- bank account
- defreezing
- investigation
- criminal revision
- Article 227
- High Court
- Indian Penal Code
- seizure of assets
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 13415 of 2024
Upendra Nath Pandey
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kamlesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 89
HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Devesh Kumar Singh,
learned AGA for the State-respondents are present.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the bank account of
the petitioner was ceased by the police on account of registration of first
information report in Case Crime No.426 of 2023 under section 406, 419,
420,467, 468, 471, 379, 411 I.P.C. Police Station- Karwi, District
Chitrakoot. Learned counsel submitted that application moved by the
petitioner for defreezing the bank account was erroneously dismissed by
the trial court, vide its order dated 23.4.2024, by holding that
investigation in the case is still pending. He further submitted that
investigation in the case was already completed before his application for
defreezing the bank account was filed. Aggrieved by the said order dated
23.4.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chitrakoot, the
petitioner preferred Criminal Revision No.28 of 2025 (Upendra Nath
Pandey vs. State of U.P.) which was also dismissed by the revisional
court on 9.7.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that both courts have
wrongly held that investigation of the case is still continuing. The bank
account of other similarly placed co-accused have already been defreezed
by orders of the Magistrate Court. Therefore, the impugned orders passed
by the trial court as well as by the revisional court dismissing the
application of the petitioner for defreezing the bank account are illegal
and are liable to be set aside.
A227 No. 13415 of 2024
2
4. Learned AGA submitted that the Chief Judicial Magistrate has
recorded his finding to the effect that the matter is still under
investigation. He further submitted that allegation against the petitioner is
that amount of money in his bank account was gained by committing
fraud. Hence, there is no illegality in the impugned orders and they do not
require any interference.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. This Court has not come to any conclusion that whether the application
for defreezing the bank account was filed before the filing of the charge-
sheet or it was filed after the charge-sheet was submitted. This Court
presumes that the application of the petitioner for defreezing the bank
account was filed before the filing of the supplementary charge-sheet.
However, a liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh application
for defreezing his bank account. If any such application is moved by the
petitioner before the concerned court, the concerned court will properly
consider each and every objection raised by the petitioner before passing
any order.
7. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of.
(Anil Kumar-X,J.)
March 25, 2026
SK
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHEEL KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…