Release of Frozen Cyber Fraud Proceeds from Mule Bank Accounts Under Section 457 CrPC / 503 BNSS
Dr. Rajesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) & HDFC Bank Ltd. — Criminal Revision Petition No. 412/2023, High Court of Delhi / Tis Hazari District Courts
The victim was defrauded of ₹8,40,000 in a Telegram YouTube-video-liking task scam via UPI and IMPS transactions. Upon immediate reporting to the 1930 Helpline within 90 minutes, the cyber cell placed a debit freeze on the beneficiary mule account holding ₹3,20,000. However, the beneficiary bank refused to refund the frozen money to the complainant without a judicial order, citing potential competing claims.
The Court held that once the Investigating Officer (IO) confirms that the funds trapped in the beneficiary mule account represent the direct proceeds of digital cheating and no rival claimants appear within reasonable notice, the magistrate has ample power under Section 457 CrPC (now Section 503 BNSS) to order restitution. The Court directed HDFC Bank to transfer the frozen ₹3,20,000 back to the complainant's verified source account upon the complainant executing an indemnity bond.
₹3,20,000 Frozen Proceeds Restored to Victim Against Indemnity Bond
When a cyber cell freezes money in a scammer's mule account, the bank will not disburse it voluntarily. Filing a formal Section 503 BNSS petition before the jurisdictional Magistrate is the definitive legal mechanism to compel the bank to release the frozen funds.