The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana, has pulled up HDFC Bank for keeping a Ludhiana resident’s account frozen for nearly three years after a ₹2,038 transaction was suspected to be linked to cyber fraud, observing that the bank could have placed a lien on the disputed amount instead.
The commission has directed the bank to immediately unfreeze the account of Gurpreet Singh, a resident of Bhai Himmat Singh Nagar, and pay ₹25,000 as composite compensation and litigation costs.
The panel also ordered the bank to pay ₹500 per day, subject to a maximum of ₹1 lakh, if it failed to unfreeze the account after receiving a copy of the order. The order was passed on September 25 by the commission, comprising president Sanjeev Batra and member Monika Bhagat. Gurpreet had been maintaining a salary savings account with HDFC Bank since 2017 and used it to make EMI payments to various financial institutions.
According to his complaint, the account was frozen in October 2023. When he approached the bank, he was told that it had been blocked following a cybercrime investigation in Surat, Gujarat.
The bank told the commission that the account had been frozen on the directions of the cyber crime police station, Surat City, after a fraudulent transaction was detected. It denied any deficiency in service and sought dismissal of the complaint.
{{/usCountry}}The bank told the commission that the account had been frozen on the directions of the cyber crime police station, Surat City, after a fraudulent transaction was detected. It denied any deficiency in service and sought dismissal of the complaint.
{{/usCountry}}Gurpreet, however, maintained that the disputed transaction was genuine. He said the ₹2,038 payment was related to repayment of a loan by a person who had borrowed money from him. He also said that he approached the bank several times seeking restoration of the account but failed to get relief.
The commission observed that the account had remained blocked for nearly three years over the relatively small disputed amount.
It noted that there was nothing on record to show that Gurpreet had been served a prior notice or named as an accused in any FIR.
The commission held that the bank could have placed a partial lien of ₹2,038 instead of freezing the account.
Referring to recent rulings of the Punjab and Haryana high court, the commission observed that freezing a bank account over a small and identifiable amount allegedly linked to cyber fraud could be disproportionate where there was no material indicating the account holder’s complicity.
The complaint was consequently partly allowed and the bank was directed to unfreeze the account immediately upon receiving a copy of the order.