THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION Nos.1818 and 1820 of 2010 Common order: Petitioners herein are the husband and wife respectively. The husband claims to be the Managing Director of V.R. Rural Equipment and Consumable Private Limited, which is incorporated under the Companies Act with the object of establishing departmental stores at Village and Mandal level and providing all types of consumer goods and equipments to the consumers at lower prices. While so, one B. Rama Murthy, lodged a complaint with the 1st respondent- Sub Inspector of Police, Managapet, alleging that he was appointed by the said company on monthly salary of Rs.4,500/- to collect basic data of requirements of villagers, and he deposited Rs.10,000/- as security deposit, but however, he is not being paid the salary and that, in the guise of providing employment, the said company is promoting illegal money circulation schemes and collecting security deposits from the unemployed youth with a promise to provide them employment and converting the said deposits into life insurance policies obtained with MAX Insurance Company. On such complaint, the 1st respondent registered a case in Crime No.59 of 2009 against the husband, for the offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners state that they were not allowed to operate their savings bank accounts bearing Nos.30435189090 and 30538267245 with the State Bank of India, Hydernagar Branch, and it was informed by the Manager of the bank, 2nd respondent herein, that in view of the instructions of the 1st respondent- Sub Inspector of Police with reference to the aforesaid crime registered, their bank accounts were freezed. The petitioners further state that no notice of any kind was issued to them as regards freezing of their bank accounts and that the allegations in the complaint lodged by the said B. Rama Murthy do not warrant seizure of their bank accounts and moreover when the wife is not involved in any case, freezing her bank account is illegal. Further, the subject matter of Crime No.59 of 2009 was settled out of Court and in view of the same, this Court quashed the proceedings in the said Crime, by order dated 16.12.2009 in Criminal Petition No.10569 of 2009. In spite of the same, the 2nd respondent is not allowing them to operate their bank accounts. Therefore, they filed the present writ petition, seeking appropriate relief. This Court, while ordering notice before admission, passed interim orders in both the matters, directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to operate their bank accounts, pending further orders. The 2nd respondent- Manager, State Bank of India, Hydernagar, filed counter-affidavits stating that, on the requisition of the 1st respondent, the accounts of the petitioners were seized, and that, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, the petitioners are permitted to operate their accounts. Since no counter-affidavit was filed by the 1st respondent, this Court, on 20.07.2010, ordered appearance of the 1st respondent before this Court. Pursuant thereto, the 1st respondent- Sub Inspector of Police, Mangapet Police Station, filed counter-affidavit, wherein it is stated that, apart from Crime No.59 of 2009, the proceedings in which crime were quashed by this Court, there is another crime registered against the husband in Crime No.62 of 2009 on the file of Mangapet Police Station, for the offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and investigation in the said case is pending. This apart, more than seven crimes are registered against the husband on the file of various police stations in Warangal District and Kukatpally Police Station of Ranga Reddy District, for the similar offences, but the petitioners intentionally did not bring the same to the notice of this Court. It is further stated that in the process of investigation, the 1st respondent addressed the 2nd respondent to furnish the particulars of the bank accounts of the petitioners and statements of accounts till date and also requested to freeze the said accounts. However, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, he addressed to the 2nd respondent, to allow the petitioners to operate their bank accounts. It is also stated that this Court, while quashing the proceedings in Crime No.59 of 2009, vide its orders 16.12.2009, directed the police concerned to investigate into the offence in general as the allegations in the complaint show that the petitioner-husband is indulging in illegal activities like money circulation etc. The 1st respondent- Investigating Officer is also present before this Court today in pursuance of the directions of this Court and he submits that the petitioner-husband was arrested in connection with the crime pending against him on the file of Mangapet Police Station and released on bail, and that the investigation in the said crime is in progress. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent bank. From a perusal of the counter-affidavit of the 1st respondent, it is clear that several crimes are registered against the husband, on the allegation of his involving in illegal activities of large-scale money circulation, and during the process of investigation, his and his wife’s bank accounts were directed to be freezed. Admittedly, a learned Judge of this Court, though quashed the proceedings in one of the crimes registered against the husband, however, directed the police concerned to investigate into the offence in general as the allegations in the complaint show that the petitioner-husband is indulging in illegal activities like money circulation etc. As per the submission of the 1st respondent- Investigating Officer, who is present before this Court, the police are conducting investigation into the crime pending against the husband and that the husband was arrested in the crime pending on the file of Mangapet Police Station and released on bail. Thus, there being crimes registered against the husband for the offence of his involving in illegal money circulation schemes, the respondent police, with a view to prevent any further money transactions by the husband and wife and flow of money from their bank accounts, directed the bank authorities to freeze their accounts, and in this factual situation, this Court cannot intervene in the matter by exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and grant the relief as sought by the petitioners. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. However, the 1st respondent is directed to complete the investigation in the crime pending on his file against the husband, and file charge sheet/final report before the concerned Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 16th August, 2010 IBL