Shri Satish Kumar Namdeo vs. Income Tax Department

WP/37408/2024HC Madhya Pradesh18 November 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA3 pages

For Petitioner: Purnima Bhalerao

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition. Regarding the direction to release the bank account, the Court held that no such direction can be given in a writ petition under Article 226. Similarly, the Court stated that it cannot direct the Police Department to register a criminal case in a writ petition. The Court found that the petitioner's allegations were unsubstantiated by any documents. It noted that if the accounts were opened without proper KYC and using forged documents, the petitioner could have obtained documents from the bank under the Right to Information Act or complained to the Ombudsman. The Court also observed that if the police did not entertain the complaint, the petitioner could have filed a criminal complaint before the Competent Court of Magistrate. The petition was dismissed due to a lack of supporting documents and delay and latches.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri Satish Kumar Namdeo, proprietor of Sapna Associates, engaged in logistics for the Defence Department, filed a writ petition seeking directions to the Income Tax Department to release his bank account and to the Police Department to register an FIR and initiate an inquiry. The petitioner was issued a notice by the Income Tax Department regarding irregular transactions in his Union Bank of India account. He contended that the account was fraudulently opened under the name 'Galaxy International' at various banks using forged documents, and he denied involvement. He had complained to the Superintendent of Police, CBI, and ED. The petitioner had also filed an online appeal against an assessment order, but its outcome was not disclosed. A request to release his Indian Overseas Bank account was denied by the Income Tax Officer (Tech). The assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act resulted in a demand of Rs. 29.58 Crores.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court, in a writ petition under Article 226, can direct the Income Tax Department to release a bank account. 2. Whether the High Court, in a writ petition under Article 226, can direct the Police Department to register an FIR and initiate an inquiry into alleged fraud. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that his bank account was fraudulently opened using forged documents and he had no involvement in the transactions. He sought the release of his bank account and an investigation by the police into the alleged fraud. He relied on his complaints made to various investigative agencies. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the Income Tax Department or other respondents. However, the Court's reasoning implies that the petitioner's allegations were unsubstantiated and that alternative remedies were available.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL ON THE 18th OF NOVEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 37408 of 2024 SHRI SATISH KUMAR NAMDEO Versus INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS Appearance: Ms. Purnima Bhalerao - Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Siddharth Sharma - Advocate for the respondent No.1. Shri Abhijeet Awasthi - Deputy Advocate General for the respondent. ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia With the consent of parties, heard finally. 1. The petitioner has filed this present petition seeking direction from the Income Tax Department to release the Bank Account and direction to the Police Department to register an FIR and start the enquiry. 2. The facts stated in the Writ Petition, in nutshell are as under :- a. The petitioner is a proprietor of Sapna Associates, which is engaged in the logistics work for the Defence Department in Jabalpur. The firm is maintaining account in Union Bank of India, Branch- Ranjhi, Jabalpur. The petitioner was served with the notice/summons by the Income Tax Department on 12.11.2018, calling explanation in respect of irregular 1 WP-37408-2024 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59642 Signed by: c0027dae-f14b- 4fa2-b3e8-59456dde5ccd Signing time: 11/25/2025 11:48:42 AM Signature Not Verified

transactions in the account in Union Bank of India. b. The petitioner participated in the enquiry with a defence that this account was fraudulently opened under the name of Galaxy International at Dhanlaxmi Bank, Karol Bagh, Delhi, Dhanlaxmi Bank, Indore and Yes Bank at Indore. The petitioner completely denied its involvement and the transactions in these three forged accounts. The petitioner made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to enquire about the fraud committed with the company. The petitioner received an information from the Union Bank of India about the closing of the actual account of Galaxy International. 3. The petitioner preferred an online appeal (Annexure P/8) against the order of assessment. However, the final outcome has not been disclosed in the present petition. The petitioner also submitted a request for releasing of the Bank Account No.058902000010552 maintained in Indian Overseas Bank, Jabalpur. But, vide letter dated 28.07.2020, the said prayer has been denied by Income Tax Officer (Tech). 4. As the assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act has been completed and there is a demand of Rs.29.58/- Crores, now, in order to save from this demand, the petitioner is seeking investigation into the matter by the Police. If the accounts were open without KYC and by using a forged document of the petitioner, the petitioner could have obtained the documents from the concerned Bank under Right to Information Act, 2005 or could have made complaint to the Ombudsman. Therefore, mere allegations 2 WP-37408-2024 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59642 Signed by: c0027dae-f14b- 4fa2-b3e8-59456dde5ccd Signing time: 11/25/2025 11:48:42 AM Signature Not Verified

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE (PRADEEP MITTAL) JUDGE without support of any document, cannot be entertained by this Court. 5. If the Police did not entertain the complaint, the petitioner could have file a criminal complaint before the Competent Court of Magistrate. No direction can be given in a Writ Petition under Article 226 to the Bank for releasing the Bank account or register a criminal case. 6. Therefore, due to lack of documents in support of averments made in the petition as well as delay and latches, present petition stands dismissed. Shivani

3 WP-37408-2024 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59642 Signed by: c0027dae-f14b- 4fa2-b3e8-59456dde5ccd Signing time: 11/25/2025 11:48:42 AM Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →