Arbitrary Freezing of Bank Accounts Violates Fundamental Rights: Telangana High Court

Justice E.V. Venugopal noted that freezing a bank account in the absence of cogent reasons or a prima facie link to a cognisable offence would amount to a serious infringement of fundamental rights. The court held that such actions violated the right to livelihood and the freedom to carry on trade and business under Article 19(1)(g), as well as the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The judge was dealing with a petition filed by Khammam-based Bottle Restaurant and Bar, whose bank account had been frozen following instructions from the cybercrime wing police of Etawah district in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner establishment contended that it had no connection with the alleged offence under investigation and that its name did not figure in the FIR. The petitioner alleged that no notice had been issued and that the action was not reported to the jurisdictional magistrate.

During the hearing, the court noted that despite the dispute involving only a limited amount, the entire account had been frozen, effectively preventing the petitioner from accessing funds or conducting business transactions. The judge remarked that such sweeping action disrupted day-to-day financial activities and could severely impact business operations.

The court reiterated that while investigating agencies may request banks to freeze accounts, they were required to promptly inform the jurisdictional court and could not continue such restrictions without notifying the account-holder about the reasons and scope of the freeze.

Holding the action to be mechanical and excessive in the petitioner’s case, the court directed that only the disputed amount, if any, be kept on hold and allowed the petitioner to operate the account for all other lawful purposes. It also instructed the superintendent of police, Etawah, to ensure compliance with the order and facilitate the immediate defreezing of the account of the petitioner.

Wife Must Prove Property Was Bought With 'Streedhan' to Claim Ownership: Telangana HC

The Telangana High Court has ruled that a wife could not claim ownership of a property unless she could clearly prove that it was purchased using her ‘streedhan’. A division bench led by Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin delivered the judgment while dismissing an appeal filed by a woman from Warangal who had challenged a September 2025 order passed by a single judge.

The case related to eight acres of land in Nagaram of Hasanparthy. The property, originally owned by the woman’s husband, was sold through a court-approved auction in 2007 to private individuals. The single judge had directed authorities to update the land records in favour of the auction buyers.

The woman argued that she should have been included in the proceedings, claiming that the land had been purchased using her ‘streedhan’. She also contended that the mutation of land records should not have been ordered without hearing her.

The bench found no merit in her claims. It noted that a lower court in Warangal had rejected her ownership claim in 2016 after she failed to provide documentary evidence to support it. The court observed that her husband had filed multiple unsuccessful objections in the past, which appeared to delay the transfer of the property.

The bench pointed out that although the woman had another appeal pending, there was no legal order supporting her claim at present. Since the auction purchasers held a valid sale certificate and she could not produce proof of ownership, the court held that there was no need to include her in the case or issue any notice to her.