Rajasthan High Court

Nitin Daiya v. State of Rajasthan

2026:RJ-JP:38234 · CRLMP/7323/2026

Decision date
2026-08-10
Text availability
Full text
Judges
Kuldeep Mathur

Source: Indian High Court Judgments, AWS Open Data (CC BY 4.0) ↗

Connected provisions and cases

No further provision or case links are recorded.

Judgment text

[2026:RJ-JP:38234] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7323/2026 CNR: RJHC010816982026 | URN: CRLMP / 12643U / 2026 Nitin Daiya S/o Nand Lal, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Khansoli, Post Office Khansoli, District Churu,rajasthan 331001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director General Of Police,police Directorate, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. National Cyber Reporting Portal, Represented By Its Director, National Highway-8, Mahalipur, New Delhi. 3. Dig, Cyber Crime, Police Head Quarters, Jaipur Rajasthan. 4. Rajasthan Gramin Bank, Through Its Branch Manager,branch Khasoli, District Churu Rajasthan. Branch Code 01772 Ifsc Code Rmgb0001772 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harsh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 10/08/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-“1. By an appropriate Misc. Petition, order or direction, the respondent may kindly be directed to de-freeze the bank account bearing account No. 0000083108737161. (i) of the petitioner in respondent bank. (ii) By an appropriate Misc. Petition, order or direction, the respondent may kindly be directed to not freeze the bank account of the petitioner in future without prior notice.”

2. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this criminal misc. petition with a direction to the Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Respondent No.4) to keep the disputed amount (the [2026:RJ-JP:38234] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-7323/2026] amount which was transferred illegally in the bank account of the petitioner) frozen and allow the petitioner to make transactions from his bank account from the remaining balance. 3. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent – Bank has not received the information regarding the exact figure of the disputed amount, which the Investigating Officer/Police alleges to be receipt(s) of the offence, the bank shall send a communication to the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, to indicate the amount to be earmarked for lien, while endorsing a copy of the instant order. 4. Upon receipt of such communication/letter, the concerned Investigating Officer/Police shall be under an obligation to apprise the respondent - Bank about the amount to be kept in lien, within a period of seven days of receiving the communication from the respondent - Bank. The respondent – bank shall thereafter do the needful as directed herein above. 5. It is further made clear that in case, the respondent-Bank does not receive any reply from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police, then it shall be duty bound to act in accordance with the instant order.

6. With the aforesaid directions, the instant criminal misc. petition is disposed of. 7. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand disposed of. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J 258/Sonia