Mumbai NDPS court orders defreezing of Rhea Chakraborty's bank account
Synopsis
A Mumbai NDPS court has ordered the defreezing of Rhea Chakraborty and her mother's ICICI Bank account, finding that the NCB never obtained the mandatory 30-day confirmation required under Section 68F of the NDPS Act — a procedural lapse that the court ruled renders the freeze legally unsustainable.
Key Takeaways
Deshmukh of a Mumbai NDPS court ordered the defreezing of an ICICI Bank account linked to Rhea Chakraborty and her mother Sandhya Chakraborty on 25 April .
The court held that the NCB failed to comply with Section 68F(2) of the NDPS Act, which requires a freezing order to be confirmed by a competent authority within 30 days .
The prosecution had argued Rhea was an active member of a drug syndicate with links to alleged drug peddlers, justifying the freeze.
The court relied on a prior Bombay High Court ruling that powers to freeze property must be exercised strictly within statutory safeguards.
The case stems from the 2020 NCB investigation into alleged drug-related activities following the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput .
The Bombay High Court had earlier also directed the return of Rhea Chakraborty's passport, citing no sufficient reason to believe she would evade proceedings.
A special NDPS court in Mumbai has ordered the defreezing of an ICICI Bank account linked to actress Rhea Chakraborty and her mother Sandhya Chakraborty, ruling that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) failed to comply with mandatory statutory provisions under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The order was passed on 25 April by Special Judge U.C. Deshmukh, who held that the continued freezing of the account could not be sustained in law.
The Legal Basis for Defreezing
The applicants had argued that the account freeze was illegal because the NCB did not follow Section 68F of the NDPS Act, which governs the seizure or freezing of property suspected to be illegally acquired. Specifically, Section 68F(2) mandates that any freezing order ceases to have effect unless confirmed by the competent authority within 30 days.
The court found no dispute on this point.
Point of View
And its apparent inability to deny the lapse in court, raises serious questions about due process in high-profile narcotics investigations. This is now the second significant legal setback for the agency in this case, following the Bombay High Court's passport order. Pattern-watchers will note that procedural non-compliance — not exoneration on merits — continues to define the legal outcomes here.
NationPress
1 May 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Mumbai court order defreezing of Rhea Chakraborty's bank account?
The court ordered defreezing because the NCB failed to comply with Section 68F(2) of the NDPS Act, which requires any freezing order to be confirmed by a competent authority within 30 days. Since no such confirmation order was passed, the court held the continued freeze could not be sustained in law.
What is Section 68F of the NDPS Act?
Section 68F of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act governs the seizure or freezing of property suspected to be illegally acquired. Sub-section (2) specifically provides that a freezing order ceases to have effect unless confirmed by the competent authority within 30 days of being passed.
What was the NCB's argument for keeping the account frozen?
The NCB's prosecution contended that statements recorded during the investigation showed Rhea Chakraborty was an active member of a drug syndicate with links to alleged drug peddlers, and therefore the freezing of the bank accounts was justified.
How does this relate to the Sushant Singh Rajput case?
The case arises from the 2020 NCB investigation into alleged drug-related activities that followed the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput. Rhea Chakraborty was among those investigated as part of that probe.
Has Rhea Chakraborty received any other legal relief in this case?
Yes. The Bombay High Court had earlier directed the return of Rhea Chakraborty's passport, observing that there was no sufficient reason to apprehend that she would evade legal proceedings. The latest bank account defreezing order is a second significant relief in the case.
