HATEM SEIKH vs KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK AND OTHERS

CWP-10896-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 121 CWP-10896-2026 Date of Decision: 07.05.2026 Hatem Seikh …Petitioner Versus Kotak Mahindra Bank and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Nitin Thatai, Advocate, Ms. Monika Thatai Advocate, Ms. Shruti Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of India (through video conferencing) with Ms. Neha Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India-respondent No.3 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent No.1 to de-freeze his bank account maintained with Kotak Mahindra Bank. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent-bank has frozen petitioner’s account without notice. As per petitioner’s information, the bank has acted upon directions of Law Enforcement Agencies. He is not involved in any criminal activity. He is not named in any FIR relating to financial fraud, if any, committed by unknown persons. There is no ord