Allahabad High Court
DUSHYANT KUMARversusTHE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS STANDING COUNSEL AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The petition is dismissed and the petitioner is directed to apply to the bank for de‑freezing, with the bank required to decide within two weeks.
Summary
Petitioner Dushyant Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Reserve Bank of India and Canara Bank to de‑freeze his bank account (No. 110238672813) which had been frozen on a complaint from an investigating agency alleging doubtful transactions. The respondent bank contended that the freeze was justified pending investigation. The Court held that the petition could not be entertained by a direct order of de‑freezing; instead, the petitioner must apply to the bank for de‑freezing and the bank must decide the request within two weeks, in accordance with the precedent set in Ashish Rawat v. Union of India. The order therefore disposes of the writ petition without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ court can issue a mandamus directing a bank to de‑freeze an account frozen on investigation grounds
- Whether the petitioner is required to approach the bank first before seeking judicial intervention
Subjects
- Article 226
- mandamus
- bank account freeze
- investigating agency
- de‑freezing
- high court
- procedural law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35629 of 2026
Dushyant Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The Reserve Bank Of India Through Its Standing
Counsel And Another .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amiruddin Siddique, Ankit Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Krishna Mohan Asthana
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Amiruddin Siddique, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Ms. Raavi Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri K.M. Asthana,
learned counsel for the respondent- bank.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for a direction in the nature of mandamus to
command the respondent concerned to de-freeze the account of the
petitioner being No.- 110238672813 maintained with Canara Bank.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that the account has
been freezed primarily on a complaint received from the Investigating
Agency for there being doubtful transactions in his account.
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the petitioner to apply before the concerned respondent for
de-freezing of the account and if he does so, the concerned respondent
shall decide the same within a further period of two weeks from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this order, in the light of the judgment of
this Court in Ashish Rawat v. Union of India and 6 others, passed in
Writ-C No. 1489 of 2026, decided on 08.04.2026.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
September 16, 2026
Atmesh
Digitally signed by :-
ATMESH KESARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…