IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.26429 of 2008 Between: R. Chellamamba Devi W/o. Late R.V. Appa Rao R/o. Block No.20, Flat No.4, Vignanpuri Colony, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, City Range – III, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The State Bank of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Vidya Nagar Branch, Vidya Nagar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in freezing the petitioner's S.B. bearing No. 52202546986 with the third respondent on the alleged directions of the second respondent in Lr.No.Cr.No.29/ACB-CR/2008, dated 31-10-2008 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art.14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the third respondent to allow the petitioner to operate her S.B. Account No.52202546986 with the third respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.SUDERSHAN REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent No.2: MR. V. RAVI KIRAN RAO (SC & Spl.PP) The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.26429 OF 2008 ORDER: According to the petitioner, she is a family pensioner and the family pension payable to her is being credited to her Savings Bank Account No.52202546986 with the 3rd respondent bank i.e. State Bank of Hyderabad, Vidyanagar Branch, Hyderabad. It is her case that on 30.11.2008, when her son went to the 3rd respondent bank to withdraw money from the aforesaid savings bank account, he was intimated that the account has been frozen and, upon enquiry, a letter dated 30.11.2008 was addressed to her by the 3rd respondent bank stating that as per the directions of the 2nd respondent- Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, City Range-II, Hyderabad, vide letter dated 31.10.2008, her account has been frozen. The petitioner complains that she has not been informed the reason for which the 2nd respondent has directed the 3rd respondent to freeze her savings bank account and that the action of the respondent authorities in freezing her savings bank account without issuing any notice to her is arbitrary and illegal. There is no necessity of going into all the details. Today, Mr. V. Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Standing Counsel and Special Public Prosecutor for Anti Corruption Bureau, appearing for the 2nd respondent, on instructions, submits that the savings bank account of the petitioner has been frozen in the process of investigation of a case registered by the Anti Corruption Bureau against the brother-in-law of the petitioner’s husband, but however, the Bureau has subsequently addressed a letter to the 3rd respondent bank not to freeze the savings bank account of the petitioner. In view of the above submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, no further orders need be passed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 8th December, 2008 Note:- Issue CC in three days. BO IBL