Olympics Begin In
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.


High Court orders Prakash Padukone's account to not be frozen

High Court orders Prakash Padukones account to not be frozen

Press Releases

Published: 5 April 2018 4:42 AM GMT
On March 16th, Prakash Padukone had his bank account frozen after a police-issued notice suggested that the former badminton player had got 'excess' money against what he invested in Vikram Investment Company. However, yesterday the High Court ordered the account to de-freeze on the ground that freezing of a bank account in the absence of strong suspicion of allegations made by the police adversely affects the right to life. According to sources, Justice Raghvendra S Chauhan issued this directive before disposing of the petition filed by Prakash Padukone, his wife Ujjala Padukone and their daughter Anisha Padukone, seeking directions to the police and the bank to de-freeze the account jointly held by them in IDBI Bank in Malleswaram in the city. It has been pointed out in the petition that Mr. Padukone, based on the investment manager's advise, in March 20017 pulled out all investments made in Vikram Investments, and paid income tax and commission as demanded by Mr. Suresh while annexing the income tax returns filed in this regard. In the petition that was filed by Padukone and his family, it is mentioned that the account was frozen illegally without even issuing a notice. "Unless and until there is a strong suspicion against the petitioners, the police would not be justified in freezing the account belonging to the petitioners. For, such freezing of account adversely affects the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," the order read. However, the court decided to de-freeze the account on the condition that the former world number one would submit a bond of `20 lakh before the sessions court judge. But the court also notified that in the complaint that was filed to the police, Padukone was not even directly named and it only said The alleged excess money of '19 lakh may belong to either Balaji or other investors'. Hence, until there are stronger reasons to suspect Padukone of misdeeds, the court deemed it fair to not keep Padukone's account frozen. ALSO READ: Can Satwik and Chirag recreate the early Lee-Hesh days in Badminton?
Next Story