JUDGMENT : BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J. The petitioner has approached this Court invoking constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution for the following reliefs:- “i. For the issuance of appropriate writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s) or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the Respondent authorities to immediately defreeze the Account of the Petitioner bearing Account No. 50100252268044 HDFC Bank at Patrakarnagar Branch, Kankarbagh (Patna) which has been frozen in Patrakarnagar P.S. Case No. 36/2021 (Special Case No. 380/2021) pending its adjudication before the Ld. Special Judge Excise- I, Patna and thereby allow the Petitioner to deposit and withdraw the money of the Petitioner available in his aforesaid bank account. ii. For any other relief/reliefs as your Lordships may deem fit and proper.” Facts of the Case 2. Patrakar Nagar P.S. Case No. 36 of 2021 (Special Case No. 380 of 2021) was registered against the petitioner on 14 th January 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 30(a)/41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 on the basis of a suo moto complaint submitted by the SHO Patrakar Nagar, Police Station, alleging, inter alia, that on 13 th January 2021, while conducting a special raid along with a team of police personnel, he apprehended one motorcycle at about 10:00 pm in front of Bhola Community Hall, Chitragupta Nagar, on suspicion. Two persons, namely, Sanjeev Kumar and Indrajeet Kumar, were riding the said motorcycle. The two said persons were interrogated, and they revealed that they were carrying foreign liquor in their backpack. Police searched the backpack of Sanjeev Kumar and found 6.525 liters of foreign liquor and some cash money from the possession of the said Sanjeev Kumar. A sum of Rs. 36,400/- (thirty-six thousand and four hundred), a small Samsung phone, and a red colored Hero Honda motorcycle bearing registration no. BR-01-AJ-3816 were recovered from the possession of Indrajeet Kumar. On further interrogation, they allegedly revealed that they, along with the petitioner and one Vishal Kumar, took three rooms on rent at Mahatma Gandhi Nagar. In one room, they used to reside, and two other rooms are used to store a large consignment of liquor, which they supply to individual customers in a clandestine manner. The police party also conducted a raid in the tenanted house of the petitioner and the apprehended persons and recovered 529.2 ltrs. In one room, they used to reside, and two other rooms are used to store a large consignment of liquor, which they supply to individual customers in a clandestine manner. The police party also conducted a raid in the tenanted house of the petitioner and the apprehended persons and recovered 529.2 ltrs. of foreign liquor from the residential room of the petitioner. Police also recovered a mobile number and diary from the possession of the petitioner. All the articles were seized by the police. The entries in the seized diary revealed huge transactions of money in connection with the supply of foreign liquor to different customers, in violation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. During the investigation of the case, the investigating officer visited HDFC Bank at Kankarbagh, Patrakar Nagar Branch for verification of the passbook of the petitioner having account number 50100252268044 . It was learnt that a sum of Rs. 23,99,796.72/- was available in the said account. On reasonable suspicion that the petitioner deposited such a huge amount of money in his bank account beyond the known source of income. It was suspected by the police that the petitioner earned and accumulated illegal money through the business of selling foreign liquors in violation of the provisions contained in the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Therefore, the I.O. requested the Bank Manager of the HDFC Bank Patrakar Nagar Branch, in writing, to freeze the said bank account in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has approached this Court to defreeze the account of the petitioner, which was frozen in connection with the above-mentioned case, presently pending before the learned Special Judge Excise I, Patna. Therefore, the I.O. requested the Bank Manager of the HDFC Bank Patrakar Nagar Branch, in writing, to freeze the said bank account in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has approached this Court to defreeze the account of the petitioner, which was frozen in connection with the above-mentioned case, presently pending before the learned Special Judge Excise I, Patna. It is found from the record that the petitioner previously moved before the learned Special Judge with the same prayer of defreezing the bank account, but vide order dated 13 th January 2023, the learned Special Judge, Excise, rejected the said application on the following grounds: ^^mHk; i{kksa dks lquk ,oa vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;kA vfHkys[k ds voyksdu ls ;g irk pyrk gS fd izLrqr okn esa izkFkfedh fcgkj e|fu"ks/k ,oa mRikn vf/kfu;e ds v/khu ntZ fd;k x;k gSA izLrqr okn ds izkFkfedh ds vuqlkj bl okn esa tIr eksVjlkbfdy fuca/ku la[;k& BR01EZ6669 ls voS/k 'kjkc dh ifjogu dh ckr dgh tkrh gS rFkk bl okn esa tIr :i;s dh fo"k; esa ;g dgk tkrk gS fd og voS/k 'kjkc dh fcdzh ls vftZr jkf’k gSA dsl nSfudh ds dafMdk&8 esa vfHk;qDr vrqy dqekj flag dk nks"kLohdkjksfDr c;ku gS ftlesa mlus voS/k 'kjkc ls dekbZ jkf’k dks ,p0Mh0,Q0lh0 [kkrk ua0 50100252268044 tek djus dh ckr dgh gSA fcgkj e|fu"ks/k ,oa mRikn vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 57¼[k½ ds vuqlkj fcgkj e|fu"ks/k ,oa mRikn vf/kfu;e ds v/khu n.Muh; fdlh vijk/k dks djus ds fy, iz;qDr lEifr dks ftyk dysDVj dks NksM+us dk {ks=kf/kdkj izkIr gSA bl dkj.k bl U;k;ky; dks [kkrk ua0 50100252268044 dks Defreeze djus dk {ks=kf/kdkj izkIr ugha gSA vr% vkosnd dk vkosnu fuokZg ;ksX; ugha gksus ds dkj.k [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2, stating, inter alia, that on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation and supervision notes issued by the supervising authority, it has been found that a sum of Rs. 23,99,796.72/- was deposited in HDFC Bank Account Number 50100252268044 maintained by the present petitioner. The I.O. had reasonable belief that the said money deposited in the account of HDFC Bank was the proceeds of crime by selling foreign liquor and therefore, it was requested to be frozen. 23,99,796.72/- was deposited in HDFC Bank Account Number 50100252268044 maintained by the present petitioner. The I.O. had reasonable belief that the said money deposited in the account of HDFC Bank was the proceeds of crime by selling foreign liquor and therefore, it was requested to be frozen. It is also submitted by the respondents that in the above- mentioned case, police has already filed charge-sheet and trial of the case will commence soon. Therefore, the respondents have raised objections against the prayer made by the petitioner. 4. I have heard Ms. Archana Singh, learned senior counsel and the learned SC 16, perused the materials and record and duly considered the case. The learned Special Judge, rejected the prayer for de-freezing the Bank account holding, inter alia, that any such order being barred by Section 57(B) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. It is the absolute jurisdiction of the District Magistrate to consider the prayer made by the petitioner. 5. Section 57(B) of the said Act runs thus:- “57(B). Things or premises liable to be released upon penalty.- (1) Any animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance used for committing any offence punishable under this Act that has been seized by any Officer or Excise Officer may be released by the Collector upon payment of such penalty as may be notified by the State Government. (2). Any premises or part thereof used for committing any offence punishable under this Act that has been seized by any police Officer or Excise Officer may be released by the Collector upon payment of such penalty as may be notified by the State Government. (3) If the person concerned does not pay the penalty, then the Collector shall proceed to confiscate the said animal, vehicle, vessel or other conveyance and premises as per section -58.” 6. A plain reading of Section 57(B) shows that the above provision relates to the release of any things, namely, a vehicle, vessel, or any other conveyance used for committing any offence punishable under the said Act and seized by the police officer or Excise Officer upon payment of a penalty by the Collector. Sub- section 2 of Section 57(B) deals with the release of any premises that is seized and sealed by the police officer or the excise officer in connection with the said Act. Sub- section 2 of Section 57(B) deals with the release of any premises that is seized and sealed by the police officer or the excise officer in connection with the said Act. Sub-Section 3 of Section 57(B) provides that if the accused fails to pay the penalty amount, the seized properties may be confiscated. 7. A bank account does not fall under the category of Section 57(B); therefore, the learned Special Judge committed an apparent error in passing the impugned order. 8. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner refers to an unreported decision passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 5305 of 2023 (Mohan Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) delivered on 18th December 2023. In the said case, a question was raised on behalf of the respondents on the jurisdictional applicability of Article 226 of the Constitution where there is efficacious relief available to the petitioner under Section 457 of the CrPC. The Division Bench of this Court found that the fact of the freezing of the bank account arising out of the criminal proceeding was not communicated to the learned Special Judge, Excise, under Section 102 of the CrPC. The Division Bench held in paragraphs 09 and 10 of the judgment as follows: “9. Learned counsel for the State submitted that writ petition is not maintainable, since petitioners have a remedy under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. in so far as getting certain relief in respect of freezing of their respective account including fixed deposit receipt. The aforementioned contention would have been appreciated provided the Investigating Officer complied Section 102 to the extent of submission of report forth with to the Jurisdictional Magistrate. The same is not forthcoming. Question of relegating the petitioners to invoke Section 457 is not warranted in the present case in view of the fact that Investigating Officer has failed to comply one of the ingredient under Section 102 and it will go to the root of the matter in other words there is a violation of statutory provision in such circumstances writ Court can interfere even though petitioners have alternative remedy. 10. 10. Accordingly, the petitioners have made out a case so as to interfere with the impugned action dated 06.06.2022, and it is set aside and ordered for defreezing of respective freezed accounts including fixed deposit receipt, both petitioners shall execute Bank guarantee before the jurisdictional Court thereby under taking to produce amount in the Court, as and when required by the Court and also to the extent that if any such order is made by the Court regarding disposal of the same, the same shall be complied with jointly and severely by them.” 9. In the instant case, it is pointed out by the learned senior counsel on behalf of the petitioner as to whether the I.O. had complied with the provision of Section 102 of the CrPC intimating the fact of freezing of the account. Therefore, the issue arises before this Court for consideration as to whether the writ petition is maintainable under the facts and circumstances of the case and, secondly, if the writ petition is maintainable, whether the frozen account of the petitioner ought to be defreezed. 10. In the instant case, as per the prosecution, a passbook in respect of Bank Account No. 50100252268044 maintained in HDFC Bank was seized by the police. The I.O. found more than Rs. 2,300,000/- was lying in the said bank account. He suspected that the money deposited in the said account is proceeds of crime. 11. The respondents failed to produce any document that the I.O. had “ reason to believe” that the money deposited in the account is proceeds of crime. When the I.O. presumably held that the said money was proceeds of crime, he ought to have submitted a report containing reasons to believe that the accused/petitioner deposited proceeds of crime in the bank account. In such a case, he had the duty to inform or to lodge a complaint before the Directorate of Enforcement because the allegation relates to using tainted money by the petitioner, keeping the same in a bank account for the purpose of suppression of crime and layering of transactions. 12. For non-compliance of statutory duty cast upon the I.O., the petitioner has always the right to challenge the action of the investigating agency by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution. 13. 12. For non-compliance of statutory duty cast upon the I.O., the petitioner has always the right to challenge the action of the investigating agency by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution. 13. In the instant case, this Court, therefore, holds that the writ petition is maintainable not against the judicial order passed by the learned Special Judge on 13 th January 2023, but against the improper action of the I.O. by freezing Account Number 50100252268044 maintained in the name of the petitioner. 14. The respondents failed to produce even an iota of evidence from the case diary or other materials to show even prima facie that the said money was deposited in the bank account as proceeds of the illegal sale of foreign liquor. 15. For the reasons stated above, this Court holds that the direction issued by the I.O. to freeze Bank Account No. 50100252268044 to the Branch Manager of the HDFC Bank, Patrakar Nagar Branch, was illegal, arbitrary, and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the order of freezing the bank account of the petitioner passed by the I.O. without any authority of any competent court is quashed and set aside. The account No. 50100252268044 is defreezed. 16. The writ petition is accordingly allowed on contest. There shall, however, be no order as to cost.