Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ishwar Marotrao Kumbhare, a retired bank manager, filed a criminal writ petition challenging a letter/communication dated 27.08.2020 issued by the Investigating Officer (Respondent No.1) to Respondent No.2 Bank, freezing his bank account where his pension was regularly deposited. The background was that an FIR (Crime No.1382 of 2017) was registered against the petitioner for offences under Sections 420, 409, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that he misused his position as bank manager and sanctioned a huge amount to an entity which was misappropriated. The petitioner contended that the freezing of his pension account caused economic hardship as it was his only source of income. The State filed an affidavit justifying the action under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). The court examined whether Section 91 Cr.P.C. empowers an Investigating Officer to freeze a bank account. The court held that Section 91 Cr.P.C. only allows for issuance of summons for production of documents or things and does not authorize freezing or attachment of bank accounts. The court found that the impugned communication was without legal authority and quashed it, directing the bank to defreeze the account. The court allowed the petition and made the rule absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Freezing of Bank Account - Section 91 Cr.P.C. - Investigating Officer's Power - The court considered whether a direction to freeze a bank account can be issued under Section 91 Cr.P.C. - Held that Section 91 Cr.P.C. only empowers the court or officer to issue summons for production of documents or things, and does not authorize freezing or attachment of bank accounts - The impugned communication freezing the petitioner's pension account was quashed (Paras 5-7). B) Criminal Procedure - Pension Account - Economic Hardship - The court noted that the petitioner's pension account was his only source of income and freezing it caused economic hardship - Held that such action without specific statutory provision is illegal and unsustainable (Paras 4-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Investigating Officer can freeze a bank account under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether such action is legal when the account contains pension amounts.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned communication dated 27.08.2020, and directed the bank to defreeze the petitioner's account. Rule made absolute.
Law Points
- Freezing of bank account under Section 91 Cr.P.C. is not permissible
- Section 91 Cr.P.C. does not authorize freezing or attachment
- Pension account cannot be frozen without specific statutory provision
- Investigating Officer cannot direct bank to freeze account under Section 91 Cr.P.C.
