NEW DELHI 18 : The Supreme Court has directed that a petition seeking standardized procedures for freezing and unfreezing bank accounts during cybercrime investigations be placed before Chief Justice of India Sanjay Kant for appropriate bench assignment.
A bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and SVN Bhatti issued the directive on January 16 after Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik informed the court that a CJI-led bench is already hearing a suo moto case on digital arrests involving similar issues. The registry has been instructed to obtain orders from the CJI regarding the matter’s placement.
The petition seeks three primary reliefs. First, it demands that no bank account be frozen without a written reasoned order and intimation to the account holder within 24 hours, with every freezing order immediately reported to the jurisdictional magistrate as mandated under Section 106(3) of BNSS/102(3) of CrPC.
Second, it calls for the Centre and Reserve Bank of India to formulate a uniform Standard Operating Procedure governing the freezing and unfreezing of bank accounts during cybercrime probes to prevent arbitrary action and ensure procedural fairness nationwide. Third, it requests appropriate guidelines for all investigating agencies, including cyber cells, to ensure compliance with constitutional safeguards.
Petitioner Vivek Varshney, represented by advocate Tushar Manohar Khairnar, alleged that Tamil Nadu police’s Cyber Cell arbitrarily froze his bank accounts without prior notice, communication, or judicial approval. He claimed the action violated his fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution.
Varshney stated that the freezing order caused complete financial paralysis, preventing him from meeting professional and personal obligations including payment of essential expenses, taxes, and liabilities. His account was reportedly frozen due to a transaction related to jewellery sale.
The petition emphasized that Section 106(3) of BNSS/102(3) of CrPC mandates immediate reporting of any property seizure or freezing to the jurisdictional magistrate. However, no such compliance was made in this case, rendering the action without jurisdiction, arbitrary, and unconstitutional.
The plea highlighted the absence of uniform procedures or SOPs governing bank account freezing during cybercrime investigations, resulting in citizens across different states facing inconsistent practices, prolonged freezing periods, and deprivation of financial rights without due process.
The petitioner urged the court to direct immediate defreezing of his accounts and frame uniform guidelines ensuring procedural safeguards, proportionality, and accountability in future actions. The plea argued that unless an account holder is proven complicit in a crime, their entire bank account should not be frozen merely because a suspicious transaction was traced to it.
Recognizing the increasing frequency of such cases, the petition requested the court formulate guidelines to protect citizens from unnecessary harassment and direct the Ministry of Home Affairs to develop uniform policies and SOPs for cases where cyber cells freeze accounts.
