Impact of Freezing Bank Accounts by Police in India: A Legal and Humanitarian Analysis
SHARE :
Introduction
The freezing of bank accounts by law enforcement agencies in India, particularly in cases of cyber fraud, has become a matter of grave concern. While the intent is to secure stolen money and facilitate investigations, the blanket freezing of accounts often results in severe financial distress for innocent account holders. The recent judgment of the Delhi High Court in Neelkanth Pharma Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr. (W.P.(C) 17905/2024) has once again highlighted the indiscriminate freezing of accounts and the urgent need for a more balanced and compassionate approach.
Judicial Concerns Over Blanket Freezing
In the Neelkanth Pharma Logistics case, the Delhi High Court observed that investigating agencies, while tracing the money trail in cyber fraud cases, often end up freezing the accounts of unintended beneficiaries—individuals and businesses who had no involvement in the crime. The Court noted that this practice results in undue hardship for traders and small businesses, disrupting their financial stability for no fault of their own.
Similarly, in Pawan Kumar Rai v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court ordered the de-freezing of a small vendor’s account that had been frozen over an alleged fraud of merely ₹105. The Court criticized the lack of reasoning in such actions and warned against the devastating impact on small businesses and individuals.
The Kerala High Court, in Dr. Sajir v. Reserve Bank of India (2023), also took a similar stance, directing banks to limit freezing orders to the amount involved in the alleged crime, instead of imposing a blanket freeze on the entire account.
Madras High Court in Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others Case No: W.P.No.25631 of 2024 said Police Cannot Order Freezing Of Bank Account Without Quantifying Amount Involved In Financial Fraud, Violates Right To Trade
The issue by many of the citizens currently face is the freezing of the account on instruction from the local Police or from the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. Many a times, the account holders have been taken into surprise that by such order of freezing, before they could realize as to why and for what purpose the accounts are freezed, enough damages are caused to their day to day financial life, since the very lifeline of the business gets severed by such unilateral orders of account freezing passed by the Police,” the court observed.
Impact on Innocent Account Holders
The indiscriminate freezing of bank accounts has several serious consequences:
- Financial Ruin of Small Businesses – Many small-scale vendors and traders rely on daily transactions to sustain their livelihoods. When their accounts are frozen without justification, they are left without access to essential working capital.
- Operational Paralysis for Corporates – Large corporations, like the petitioner in the Neelkanth Pharma Logistics case, may face severe disruptions in their operations. In this instance, a company with a withdrawable balance of over ₹93 crore was frozen over a mere ₹200 transaction, illustrating the disproportionate nature of such measures.
- Erosion of Trust in the Banking System – Frequent and unjustified freezing of accounts can discourage businesses from engaging in digital transactions, ultimately undermining financial inclusion and the Digital India initiative.
- Violation of Due Process and Fundamental Rights – The freezing of accounts without proper justification violates the principles of natural justice and can be seen as an infringement on an individual’s right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Need for a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
Recognizing the far-reaching consequences of blanket freezing, the Delhi High Court has urged the Ministry of Home Affairs to develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that ensures:
- Proportional Freezing – Investigating agencies should only freeze the amount suspected to be linked to the crime, rather than freezing the entire account.
- Justification and Due Process – Authorities must provide clear reasons for freezing an account, allowing the affected party an opportunity to challenge the decision.
- Priority to Lien Marking – Courts have suggested that, wherever possible, marking a lien on the disputed amount should be the preferred approach, instead of outright freezing the account.
- Expedited Review Mechanism – A dedicated mechanism should be in place to ensure quick resolution of cases where account holders prove their innocence.
Conclusion
While law enforcement agencies must have the necessary tools to combat cybercrime, their actions must be balanced against the fundamental rights of innocent account holders. Courts across India have consistently emphasized the need for a more measured approach, advocating for targeted freezing, justification for such actions, and the prioritization of lien marking over blanket account freezes. A well-defined SOP, formulated in consultation with stakeholders, can ensure that cyber fraud investigations do not turn into financial death sentences for innocent individuals and businesses.
As India progresses in its digital journey, ensuring a fair, transparent, and rights-based approach to cybercrime investigations is not just a legal necessity but a moral imperative.
