OquiliaOquilia
Legal

Rajasthan High Court sends frozen-account holders to Home Ministry SOP grievance route

The Rajasthan High Court told two Jodhpur businesses with accounts frozen in a cyber-crime inquiry to use the Home Ministry SOP's grievance process before approaching the court.

Key points

  • The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur on 28 October 2026 disposed of two petitions against bank account freezes in a cyber-crime inquiry.
  • The YES Bank and ICICI Bank accounts were frozen in late 2024 and early 2025; the court did not grant the compensation sought.
  • Account holders must first use the multi-level grievance process in the Home Ministry SOP, but may return to court over undue delay.
Oquilia Newsroom
Financial news desk covering SEBI, RBI, IRDAI, and Budget-related developments.
2 min read · 365 wordsहिन्दी में पढ़ें
Verified SourcesSource: Rajasthan High Court
Legal / 29 Oct 2026 / Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur on 28 October 2026 told two businesses whose bank accounts were frozen in a cyber-crime inquiry to use the grievance process under a Ministry of Home Affairs Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) before seeking the court's help. The accounts, with YES Bank and ICICI Bank in Jodhpur, had been frozen since late 2024 and early 2025.

What Happened

According to the order, a Jodhpur electrical-goods firm said its YES Bank current and savings accounts were frozen in November 2024 and January 2025 without notice, at the instance of the cyber crime police in Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh. A Jodhpur company made a similar petition about its ICICI Bank account. They sought de-freezing and compensation of Rs 4,00,000 and Rs 2,00,000.

The businesses argued that the SOP, dated 2 January 2026, could not apply to freezes made before it, and that they had already complained by email. The court rejected this and disposed of the petitions in the same terms as an earlier judgment of the High Court, giving them liberty to use the remedies in the SOP and other laws. The order did not grant the compensation sought.

The earlier judgment, quoted in the order, said the SOP provides a time-bound, multi-level process from the bank branch to the investigating authorities and District and State Grievance Officers, including partial or full de-freezing where warranted. It held that going to the High Court without using it is premature, and that a freeze based on system alerts is not arbitrary merely for lack of prior notice. It added that account holders may return to court if authorities act with malice or arbitrarily, or delay unreasonably, and that freezes should be proportionate and reviewed periodically.

What It Means

Account holders whose accounts are frozen over a cyber-fraud complaint are expected to first file a grievance through their bank under the SOP; a court petition filed straight away may be sent back. The banks and authorities told the court that the 90-day period in the SOP runs from when a grievance is filed. Cyber fraud can be reported at https://cybercrime.gov.in or helpline 1930, and complaints about a bank at https://cms.rbi.org.in.

Source: High Court judgment

Sources & Citations

  1. High Court judgment — Rajasthan High Court

This article was last reviewed on 29 October 2026 by Oquilia's editorial team. Every claim is sourced from primary regulatory materials (CBDT, IRDAI, RBI, SEBI, Indian Kanoon). View our methodology.

Found an error? Report an issue.