Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights: Hearing Required Before Classifying Bank Accounts as 'Fraudulent,' MP High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, presided over by HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI and HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA, delivered a judgment on September 8, 2023, that reaffirms the importance of fundamental rights and the principles of natural justice in the banking sector.

The case, Writ Petition No. 22760 of 2023, involved a challenge to the constitutional validity of master directions on 'Fraud - Classification and Reporting' issued by respondent No.1, ICICI Bank. The petitioner, Rajiv Soni, alleged that these directions were arbitrary and unjust as they did not provide an opportunity for show cause notice or a personal hearing before classifying an account as 'fraudulent.'

The High Court, in its judgment, emphasized the significance of upholding fundamental rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution. It noted, "No opportunity of being heard is required before an FIR is lodged and registered." The classification of an account as fraudulent not only has criminal consequences but also affects access to banking facilities, making it essential to provide a hearing.

The judgment referred to a similar case in the High Court of Telangana, where the principles of audi alteram partem were upheld. The High Court directed the Joint Lenders' Forum (JLF) to provide an opportunity for a hearing and personal representation before classifying an account as 'fraudulent.'

Importantly, the High Court cited the recent Supreme Court judgment in State Bank of India & Ors. vs. Rajesh Agrawal & Ors., (2023) 6 SCC 1, which upheld the need for a hearing before classifying an account as 'fraudulent.' The judgment summarized its conclusions, stating, "The principles of natural justice demand that the borrowers must be served a notice, given an opportunity to explain the conclusions of the forensic audit report, and be allowed to represent by the banks/JLF before their account is classified as fraud."

High Court disposed of the petition, quashing any actions taken against the petitioner, including FIR registration and fraud declaration. However, it clarified that the impugned circular on 'Fraud - Classification and Reporting' would remain in existence, and respondents could proceed in accordance with law and the principles laid down in the State Bank of India judgment.

Date of Decision: 8th September 2023

RAJIV SONI vs ICICI Bank Chairman

Latest Legal News