The Bombay High Court has restrained the withdrawal of bank funds and creation of third-party rights over attached assets pending adjudication.
The bench of Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Advait M. Sethna has modified an earlier order to clarify that, until the Adjudicating Authority passes its final order, the writ petitioner cannot withdraw or remove amounts lying in the relevant bank account as on the date of the court’s order and cannot create any third-party rights over assets that are under attachment.
Buy Now: E-Magazine: 1000+ Landmark GST Judgments (2017–2026)
The proceedings arose from a praecipe moved for “speaking to the minutes” of an earlier order dated July 7, 2026.
Abhishek Rastogi, on behalf of the petitioner contended that the operative portion of the earlier order was required to be recalled, deleted or modified. The High Court heard the petitioner’s counsel, Abhishek Rastogi, as well as Jitendra B. Mishra, appearing for the respondents.
After hearing the parties, the Division Bench decided to modify Clause (f) of its July 7 order.
Bank Balance Cannot Be Removed Until Final Adjudication
The modified clause imposes a specific restraint on the petitioner pending the final decision of the Adjudicating Authority.
The High Court clarified that until the Adjudicating Authority passes its final order, the petitioner “shall neither remove any amount lying in bank account on the date of passing of this order” nor create any third-party right over the attached assets belonging to the writ petitioner.
Thus, the restraint concerning the bank account is tied to the amount lying in the account on the date contemplated by the modified order.
At the same time, the Court has expressly prohibited the creation of third-party rights in respect of assets that are under attachment and belong to the petitioner.
The restrictions are to continue until the final order is passed by the Adjudicating Authority.
Earlier Order Modified Only to Limited Extent
Importantly, the High Court did not recall or replace its July 7 order in its entirety.
After substituting Clause (f), the Bench expressly stated that the order dated July 7, 2026 would stand modified only to that extent, while the remainder of the earlier order would continue to remain unchanged.
The Court also directed that the corrected order be uploaded and disposed of the praecipe.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
