State governments, through High Court-directed SOPs, should be legally bound to compel banks to freeze cyber-fraud-linked mule accounts within 24 hours of identification.
Aaj ki debate ka motion yeh hai: 'State Governments Must Mandate Banks to Freeze Mule Accounts Within 24 Hours' — yani kya rajya sarkar ke paas yeh adhikar aur zimmedari hai ki woh banks ko 24 ghante ke andar mule accounts freeze karne ka aadesh de? Yeh ek atyant zaroori sawaal hai kyunki digital financial fraud aaj common citizens ko seedha nuksan pahuncha raha hai. Main Counsel Aarav se request karungi ki woh pehle apna paksh rakhein.
My lord, main yeh dalil deta hoon ki mule accounts ek organised fraud ka backbone hain — aur RBI KYC Directions 2025 ka Section 68 khud banks par yeh dayitva daalti hai ki woh money mule accounts ko identify karein aur appropriate action lein, jisme suspicious transactions ki reporting FIU-IND ko karna shamil hai. Lekin sirf reporting kafi nahi hai — jab tak ek mule account 24 ghante mein freeze nahi hota, criminal proceeds system se bahar nikal jaate hain aur peedit ka paisa hamesha ke liye kho jaata hai. Isliye State Governments ko yeh mandate dena zaroori hai taaki ek time-bound, enforceable mechanism bane — kyunki bina state-level obligation ke, RBI ka yeh direction sirf ek advisory ban kar reh jaati hai, aur fraud victims ko koi real relief nahi milti.
Ref: RBI (Commercial Banks – Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025 · Section 68
My Lord, main is motion ka poora vipaksh karti hoon — kyunki State Governments ke paas banks ko freeze karne ka koi constitutional ya statutory authority hi nahi hai; banking ek Central subject hai, Union List Entry 45, aur RBI KYC Directions 2025 ka Section 68 yeh saabit karta hai ki mule accounts ki identification aur action lena bank ka apna regulatory dayitva hai, State ka nahi. Paksh yeh nahin bata sakta ki State kaunse valid legal mechanism se ek regulated entity — jo RBI ke under hai — ko 24-ghante mein freeze karne ka mandate de sakti hai, bina jurisdictional overreach ke. Isliye yeh motion fundamentally flawed hai aur is debate mein meri dalil yahi rahegi ki existing framework — RBI aur PMLA ke through — already sufficient hai; State mandate ek parallel, unconstitutional structure create karega.
Ref: RBI (Commercial Banks – Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025 · Section 68
My Lord, vipaksh kehta hai ki yeh ek Central subject hai aur State mandate nahi de sakta — lekin main kehna chahta hoon ki RBI KYC Directions 2025 ka Section 68 banks par sirf ek broad obligation daalta hai 'appropriate action' lene ka, koi specific time-bound freeze mandate nahi deta. Yahi gap hai jo State ko fill karna chahiye — kyunki cyber fraud victims State ke nagarik hain, aur 24-ghante ki delay mein paisa nikal jaata hai. Isliye State ka mandate is legislative gap ko address karta hai, ussse collide nahi karta.
Ref: RBI (Commercial Banks – Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025 · Section 68
My Lord, paksh ne RBI KYC Directions ka hawala diya — lekin main kehna chahti hoon ki A1, Section 68 mein RBI ne banks ko sirf 'appropriate action' lene ka direction diya hai, aur woh appropriate action kya hoga yeh determine karne ka adhikar Central regulator — yaani RBI — ke paas hai, kisi State Government ke paas nahi. State Legislature ke paas banking ka subject nahi hai — Constitution ki Seventh Schedule, List I, Entry 45 banking ko exclusively Union ka subject banata hai — isliye State Governments ka koi bhi mandate jo banks ko 24 ghante mein freeze karne ka hukm de, woh ultra vires hoga. Paksh ki poori dalil ek aisi 'mandate' par tiki hai jise State dena hi nahi kar sakti — aur yeh fundamental constitutional limitation hai jise koi bhi rebuttal change nahi kar sakta.
Ref: RBI (Commercial Banks – Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025 · Section 68
Prosecution ki taraf se yeh strong argument aaya ki mule accounts ko identify karke 24 ghante mein freeze karna fraud victims ke liye zaroori hai — aur RBI KYC Directions 2025 ka Section 68 banks par yeh daayitva pehle se dalta hai. Defence ki taraf se yeh kaha gaya ki banking regulation ek Central subject hai, isliye State Government ka aise mandate karna constitutionally ultra vires hoga — aur existing PMLA framework, jisme reporting entities par KYC aur CDD obligations hain, pehle se adequate safeguards deta hai. Nyaya ki taraf se balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: State Governments direct freeze mandate jaari karne ki jagah apne State Police aur Cyber Crime units ko empower karen ki woh RBI KYC Directions 2025 ke Section 68 ke tahat bank-reported suspicious accounts ka data le kar FIU-IND aur concerned banks ke saath 24-ghante SLA mein coordinate karen — yeh constitutionally sound bhi hoga aur practically effective bhi. Ab citizens se appeal karti hoon ki is debate ko rate karen aur apni raay share karen.
Ref: RBI (Commercial Banks – Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025 · Section 68