Allahabad High Court

RAM MURATversusREGIONAL MANAGER BANK OF BARODA AND 2 OTHERS

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY

Holding

The court held that the bank must consider the petitioner’s application and, absent any legal impediment, must restore operational status to the frozen account.

Summary

Petitioner Ram Murat filed a writ petition alleging that his savings account with Bank of Baroda was frozen on the premise that a loan taken by his father remained unpaid, which he contends has already been settled. The bank argued that it would examine any application made by the petitioner and, if no legal impediment existed, would reactivate the account. The court noted these submissions and directed that the petitioner be granted liberty to file an application with the bank. It further observed that the bank should decide the application expeditiously. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, granting the petitioner the requested liberty.

Issues considered

Whether the bank can freeze a depositor's savings account on the ground of an alleged unpaid loan of a relative without prior adjudication.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief directing the bank to consider his application and restore the account if no legal impediment exists.

Subjects

bank account freeze
loan repayment
writ petition
banking law
procedural fairness
right to property

Judgment

                                             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                              WRIT - C No. - 38300 of 2026

                                    Ram Murat
                                                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                        Versus

                                    Regional Manager Bank Of Baroda And 2 Others
                                                                                             .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Dhiranjan Singh Patel, Sheo Kinkar
                                                                       Singh
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)        : Anadi Krishna Narayana

                                    Court No. - 36
                                               HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

                                    1. Heard Sri Sheo Kinkar Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri

                                    Ajal Krishna, Advocate respondents.


                                    2. Petitioner has come up with a case that his saving bank account

                                    maintained by Respondent-Bank is freezed probably on ground that a loan

                                    taken by his father is not paid though according to learned counsel for

                                    petitioner it was paid.


                                    3. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent-Bank submits that in case

                                    petitioner files an application, relevant reasons will be provided and if

                                    there if no legal impediment, petitioner’s account will be made

                                    operational.


                                    4. In aforesaid circumstances, taking note of above submissions, this writ

                                    petition is disposed of granting above liberty to petitioner with further

                                    observation that application be decided by concerned respondent

                                    expeditiously.


                                                                                 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    AK




Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…