ARSHAD QURESHI S/O MAKBOOL QURESHI vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN — CW/1529/2026

Case under Other Acts Section NO. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 28-Jan-2026

CNR: RJHC020069292026

Filing Number

CW/3779/2026

Filing Date

20-Jan-2026

Registration No

CW/1529/2026

Registration Date

22-Jan-2026

Judge

Anuroop Singhi

Coram

Anuroop Singhi

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Matters relating to Bank Loans and Transactions ( 3100 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Other Acts Section NO

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ARSHAD QURESHI S/O MAKBOOL QURESHI

    Adv. ANITA GOYAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF RAJASTHAN

  2. 2.CSB BANK

    Adv. VED PRAKASH SHARMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    Anuroop SinghiView PDF

    The Rajasthan High Court ordered CSB Bank to de-freeze the petitioner's bank account within three days, allowing normal banking operations on funds exceeding the disputed Rs. 9,500 allegedly involved in a cyber fraud. The court ruled that completely freezing the account would unjustly prejudice the petitioner's rights; however, the disputed amount remains frozen as a lien pending investigation completion, with the petitioner required to cooperate with authorities and maintain the account. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2026

    Anuroop SinghiView PDF

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Anuroop SinghiView PDF

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    Anuroop SinghiView PDF

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    Anuroop SinghiView PDF

  7. 28-Jan-2026

    For Admission- Fresh (With Stay)

  8. 20-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CW/1529/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Rajasthan High Court ordered CSB Bank to de-freeze the petitioner's bank account within three days, allowing normal banking operations on funds exceeding the disputed Rs. 9,500 allegedly involved in a cyber fraud. The court ruled that completely freezing the account would unjustly prejudice the petitioner's rights; however, the disputed amount remains frozen as a lien pending investigation completion, with the petitioner required to cooperate with authorities and maintain the account. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case