Summary: The Delhi High Court decided on a case involving Pay 10 Services, whose bank account was frozen because of a criminal investigation by Tamil Nadu Police. The court ruled that the case should be handled as a criminal matter.
On February 26, 2026, the Delhi High Court, led by Judge Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, looked into a request from Pay 10 Services Private Limited. The company was challenging actions taken under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the Information Technology Act, 2000, which resulted in their bank account being frozen.
The main question was whether this case should be seen as a civil or criminal matter. Pay 10 Services argued that their rights were violated when their account was frozen, saying it was a civil issue. However, the Tamil Nadu Police, represented by Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, argued that the matter was criminal because of an ongoing investigation.
The court looked at different past cases and decided that the nature of the dispute was criminal. The Tamil Nadu Police had started the freeze based on warnings and complaints about fake activities linked to Pay 10 Services' account.
"The beginning of the whole dispute, therefore, lies in the ongoing criminal investigation."
The court decided that the request should be registered as a criminal case. This decision was based on the main nature of the case being criminal, even though there might be some civil aspects.
Judge Kaurav instructed that the case be handled by the proper criminal court. This decision shows the importance of correctly identifying legal disputes based on their main issues, ensuring that the right legal processes are followed.
