Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 87 (MEG)

Jimbe R. Marak v. State of Meghalaya

2015-06-16

S.R.SEN

body2015
JUDGMENT : The brief fact of the case in a nutshell is that: “The petitioner married one Shri Savio Ch. Marak MLP, Constable Arm Branch of 1st Battalion MLP, in the year 2004. After her marriage she was staying with her husband at Malki, Shillong and after few months she shifted to Mawiong 1st Battalion quarter, Shillong. That during the conflict of Rabha and Garo her husband was transferred to Mendipathar, North Garo Hills District, Meghalaya somewhere in the month of January 2011 and after her husband was transferred, the petitioner shifted to her ancestral home at Hahim, Kamrup District, Assam. The house of the petitioner were raided in many occasion by the police personnel from Meghalaya (West Khasi Hills Police), moreover the said police personnel without any valid reason harassed the petitioner while conducting the search in her house. The petitioner apprised about the said incident to the Superintendent of Police, West Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya, but unfortunately even after her personal request to the said officer the police personnel continue to raid the house of the petitioner without any fault from her end. The petitioner on the month of August 2012 shifted to her mother-in-law’s house at Kolmensalgre, Williamnagar, East Garo Hills District, Meghalaya, due to the frequent police harassment and start staying with her in-laws. The petitioner opens a bank account Number 32537404326. On 03-10-2012 the petitioner personally deposit a sum of Rs. 20, 000/0 (Rupees Twenty thousand) only and thereafter in two occasion the petitioner’s brother deposit Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only and Rs. 8000/- (Rupees Eight thousand) only on 04-06-2012 and 03-08-2012 respectively at Williamnagar Branch, State Bank of India. On 18th August 2013 the petitioner tried to withdraw some amount of money through her ATM card, but she failed to withdraw the amount, the said problem was brought into the notice of the Bank authorities, but the petitioner was shocked to learn from the bank authorities that her Account was frozen by the Bank on the direction of the Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya. The Account of the petitioner was frozen without any valid reason; moreover no show cause notice was ever issued to the petitioner by any of the Respondents before freezing the said Bank Account. The Account of the petitioner was frozen without any valid reason; moreover no show cause notice was ever issued to the petitioner by any of the Respondents before freezing the said Bank Account. That on 27th September 2013 as per the verbal advice of the Bank Manager the petitioner met the Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya. Upon enquiry of the petitioner, it was informed by the Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya that a huge amount of money was transfer in the said Account, and her husband is using the Cheque book of the said Account. The petitioner updated her pass book which clearly indicates that there were no such transactions, nor was any huge amount of money was ever deposited in the said Account as claimed by the said police officer. The petitioner has requested the Chief Manager, Williamnagar Branch vide letter dated 7th October 2012 to allow her to operate the said Account, but neither the said letter was received by the Bank authority nor the said Account of the petitioner was unlocked by the Bank. The petitioner through this Writ Petition assails the arbitrary and illegal action on the part of the Respondents in not allowing the petitioner to operate her bank Saving Account No. 32537404326, State Bank of India, Williamnagar Branch. Hence this Petition”. 2. The petition has been moved by Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that, without any enquiry or notice, the petitioner’s pass book bearing SBI Account No. 32537404326, State Bank of India, Williamnagar Branch have been frozen by the Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya on the mere plea that this Account number may be used by her husband who is a suspected militant. The learned counsel for the petitioner raised a question before this court; if at all the police require seizing the account, there must be a speaking order giving the reason for which it is frozen, and prayed that, necessary order may be passed. 3. On the other hand, Mr. K.P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing for the State submits that, the petitioner now is withdrawing and operating the said account since 31.01.2014. He also further submitted that the account was frozen only for a few months. 4. 3. On the other hand, Mr. K.P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing for the State submits that, the petitioner now is withdrawing and operating the said account since 31.01.2014. He also further submitted that the account was frozen only for a few months. 4. After hearing the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that before freezing any account of any person, it is necessary for the freezing authority to enquire into the matter and details and to pass a reason order so that, the aggrieved party/account holder will know the reason for which, his or her account has been freeze. We cannot freeze the account of a person on mere suspicion because it may cause hardship to the account holder. We must remember that in law we must act in a manner as law desires, otherwise not. Since there is no allegation that, till date the said account has been operated by the petitioner’s husband or any other militants, she is hereby allowed to operate her account freely. 5. The respondents No. 3 (The Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Tura, Meghalaya) and the respondent No. 5 (State Bank of India, Williamnagar Branch, East Garo Hills District, Meghalaya, represented by its Branch Manager) are also directed not to be a hindrance in the operation of the account until it is required and it should be in accordance with law. 6. I hereby disposed of this matter with a caution to the respondent No. 3 (Superintendent of Police, West Garo Hills District, Tura, Meghalaya) not to repeat the same in future. 7. With this observation and direction the matter stands disposed of.