Introduction
Bank account freezing by cyber cells has become a common and often unregulated tool used during investigations. In this important case — Mukesh v. State of Rajasthan, the Rajasthan High Court took a balanced approach by safeguarding the petitioner’s financial rights while ensuring ongoing investigation was not hampered.
This judgment is a significant precedent for account holders affected by arbitrary freezing of their bank accounts.
⸻
🧾 Case Details
• Case Title: Mukesh v. State of Rajasthan
• Date of Judgment: 12 March 2025
• Court: Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur Bench
• Presiding Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur
• Petitioner: Mukesh
• Respondent: State of Rajasthan
• Bank Involved: HDFC Bank
• Cause of Action: Bank account frozen by cyber cell over suspected fraudulent transaction involving ₹43,254
⸻
⚖️ Legal Issue
The key question before the court was:
Can a person’s entire bank account be frozen for an alleged cyber transaction of ₹43,254 without following due process under Section 102(3) of CrPC?
⸻
🧑⚖️ Court’s Observation
Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur observed:
• The entire account of the petitioner was frozen on the direction of the Cyber Cell without proper justification.
• Freezing of the entire account created undue hardship to the petitioner, especially when only a limited amount was under investigation.
• The investigating authority had not complied with Section 102(3) of CrPC, which mandates informing the Magistrate about such seizure or freeze.
⸻
📝 Final Order
The Hon’ble Court directed:
• Only ₹43,254 (allegedly received in the fraudulent transaction) be kept frozen.
• The petitioner be allowed to operate the rest of the account without any hindrance.
• The investigating officer shall ensure cooperation from the petitioner during the probe.
⸻
🧩 Legal Importance of the Judgment
✅ Reinforces that:
• Entire account cannot be frozen arbitrarily without due process.
• Section 102 CrPC must be strictly followed, including timely reporting to the Magistrate.
• Courts are inclined to balance investigation with financial liberty.
⸻
📚 Section Referred:
• Section 102 CrPC: Powers of Police to seize property.
• IT Act Sections (if applicable): 66C/66D (Identity theft, cheating by personation)
⸻
🔗 Download Judgment (PDF):
You can access and download the full judgment from the link below:
📄 Mukesh v. State of Rajasthan Judgment (2025) – Full Text (indiankanoon)
⸻
📞 Need Help in Bank Account Freeze Matters?
If your account has been wrongly frozen or you are facing issues due to cyber cell action:
🧑⚖️ Advocate Adarsh Singhal
Cyber Crime Lawyer | Rajasthan High Court
📞 +91-8952090299
📧 advadarshsinghal@gmail.com | contact@advocateadarsh.com