Bank account restraint during investigation upheld where cheque presentation was unproven and factual disputes barred writ relief.

A bank account may be restrained during a criminal investigation where it has a direct link to the alleged offence, and a writ court will not interfere on disputed questions of fact or doubtful documentary authenticity without convincing proof. The court found that a stamped counterfoil did not conclusively establish actual presentation of the cheque, and the absence of prompt follow-up weakened the claim. It also noted that the drawer's account was shown as closed before the alleged presentation and that the cheque formed part of a pending investigation. On those facts, the petitioner failed to make a credible case for writ relief, and the challenge was rejected on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner had established actual presentation of the cheque before the bank and a consequent entitlement to relief in writ jurisdiction despite the freezing of the account in connection with a criminal investigation.

Analysis: The only substantive issue turned on the credibility of the alleged cheque deposit and the surrounding circumstances. The court noted that a stamped counterfoil alone did not conclusively prove that the cheque had been successfully presented or processed by the bank. It further found that there had been no prompt follow-up for a long period, which cast doubt on the claim. The court also took note that the drawer's account had been shown to be closed before the alleged presentation and that the cheque formed part of a pending criminal investigation. In that context, the court relied on the principle that a bank account can be treated as property for purposes of seizure where it has a direct link with the alleged offence.

Conclusion: The petitioner failed to establish a credible case for interference, and the writ claim was rejected on merits.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the banking and investigative action did not succeed, and no writ relief was granted.

Ratio Decidendi: A bank account may be subjected to seizure or restraint during investigation where it is linked to the alleged offence, and a writ court will not interfere on disputed questions of fact or documentary authenticity absent convincing proof.

---