Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a bank could freeze a customer's current account on its own, on the basis of an alleged suspicious transaction, and whether Section 12 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 or the Reserve Bank of India circular on suspicious transaction reporting authorized such freezing.
Analysis: The account was frozen without any FIR, complaint, or order of a competent authority. The statutory provisions relied upon by the bank dealt with maintenance of records, confidentiality, and reporting obligations of a reporting entity, and did not confer a power on the bank to unilaterally freeze an account. The cited RBI circular clarified that filing of a suspicious transaction report does not justify placing restrictions on account operations. The Court further held that freezing of an account can be justified only when supported by lawful authority, such as action by an investigating agency or a lawful lien, and that a bank cannot assume the role of an investigating agency or act on unverified suspicion.
Conclusion: The freezing of the account was illegal and unsustainable. The petitioners were entitled to de-freezing and to continue operating the account.