Cybercrime has rapidly emerged as one of India’s most complex law enforcement challenges, fuelled by the explosive growth of digital payments and the increasing sophistication of online fraud. To prevent dissipation of suspected proceeds of crime, Cyber Cells frequently resort to freezing bank accounts under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, my study reveals that such freezes are often imposed without adequate scrutiny, notice, or judicial oversight, resulting in significant procedural and constitutional concerns. This research analyzes how these practices intersect with fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300A, and highlights the profound financial, emotional, and professional hardships experienced by innocent citizens caught in the investigative net. Through doctrinal analysis, case law review, and comparative assessment with safeguards in the UK, US, and EU, the study demonstrates that the current Indian framework lacks standardized procedures, transparency, and accessible redressal mechanisms. The findings emphasize the urgent need for reform, ranging from mandatory notice requirements and periodic review of freezing orders to clear SOPs for Cyber Cells and strengthened grievance pathways. Ultimately, the study argues that effective cybercrime control and protection of civil liberties are not competing objectives but essential complements. A balanced, rights-respecting approach is indispensable to ensure that digital policing enhances public trust rather than undermining it.