High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus lt is further prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to A. To dectaring the action of the Respondents as arbitrary and unjustified when the Bread and Butter of the 300 employees is dependent on functioning of the company. B. and consequently, to direct the Respondents to defreeze the bank account so that the pending salary and remuneration of all the employees be :t,g lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents Authority herein not to do anything just based on mere suspicion which can impact so many people and their daily needs, Alternatively the accounts can be operated with the guidance and monitoring of this Honourable court pending disposal of the Writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. B. VENKAT RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 'l&3: GP FOR HOME Cpunsel for the Respondent No.2:- The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.8199 of 2025 ORDER: Heard leamed counsel for petitioner and learned Govemment Pleader for Home appearing on behalf olrespondent Nos.1 & 3, and perused the record. With the consent of the counsel appearing for the respective parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

2. Despite this Court granting permission to the petitioner to take out notice to 2"d respondent, proof of service is not hled till date. However, having regard to the nature of /ls involved and the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. Shom of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner in brief is that the respondent authorities on mere suspicion, have issued communication to the 2nd respondent, on the basis of which its bank account has been freezed by the 2"d respondent.

4. Petitioner further contends that the action of the respondent authorities in particular the 1" respondent in issuing such 2 communlcation on the basis of which petitioner,s bank account has been freezed has affected 300 employees who are dependents on functioning of the petitioner Company and thus, seeks for issuance of a direction to de-freeze the aforesaid bank account of.the petitioner.

5. Per contra,learrred Government pleader appearing on behalfof respondent Nos.l and 3 would submit that pursuant to the direction of this court dated l9-03-2025,the petitioner has submitted statement of its bank accounr for the period 11_01_2024 to 26_07_2024; that scrutiny of the aforesaid account showed that Rs.14.00 crores have come into petitioner's account Lrnder Invoice Discounting, out of which Rs.5.00 crores have gone back to Capital protection Forces Private Limited and there is still balance of Rs.9.00 crores in petitioner's account.

6. Learned Govemment pleader would further submit that in addition to the Cr.No. lOl2O25 registered, the authorities have also registered two more cases vide Cr.Nos.l l/2025 and, 12/2025 on the basis of complaints lodged by different individuals and are under investigation.

7. Having regard to the submissions made as above, though the petitioner while approaching this Courl has claimed of it having no r;.:mFy *, .,- - , l., -d-p/ -'v /" 3 connection whatsoever with the accused in Cr.No.10/2025, since the statement of petitioner's bank account showed transactions between petitioner and Capital Protection Force Private Limited, though it is claimed as being in the course ofregular business transaction between two companies, since are factual issues, the same cannot be gone into a Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia. Thus, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should be relegated to avail remedies by apiproaching the concerned Magistrate in terms of provisions of Section 45 I Cr.P.C. - Section 497 BNSS to seek for de- freezing his account by establishing its case. 8 Subject to above observation and direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

9. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending shalt stand closed \ //TRUE COPY// SD/.T. JAYASREE DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 5 b BM LS . The Deputy Commissioner, Economic Offences Wing, Home Department, State of Telangana. . ine-rcicie"n"tiLio., Aurobindo Galaxy, Ground Floor, WingA.and B, Plot No f forming Part of Sy. No.83/'1 ,Hyderabad Knowledge City' TSIIC' Raidurg Serilinoairoallv. Disi., Hvderabad, Telangana 500081 . i# it-i""i&l Sbcretdrv,'uome Departmdnt, Secretariat,T'S, Hyderabad' . one cc td sRl. B. VENKAT RAO, Advocate [oPUC] . iwo CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana at . Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUTj (r HIGH COURT DATED:2610312025 ORDER WP.No.8199 of 2025 A J ,) 1 H IS I e 2 0 PA R 202 5 o* cATP t gO \ ,I $(, C .Ls DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ?s I