The Delhi court ordered the Indian Bank to release him $77,000 was withheld from a pensioner’s account and he said the bank could not refuse to provide relief to a victim of online fraud once the case had been internally classified as “not bank fraud”.
Additional Sessions Judge Harjorvarinder Singh Jaggi was hearing a review petition filed by Yogendra Kumar Singh, challenging the lower court’s order in which he sought release of funds fraudulently transferred from his pension account in three transactions on May 3, 2025.
He immediately informed the bank branch in Tughlaqabad and also filed a complaint with the cyber police on the same day.
In an order dated May 12, the court said: “The trial court has committed a grave error by completely ignoring these binding guidelines of the RBI…while ignoring the undeniable documentary evidence in the bank statement of the petitioner which shows that $$77,000 has already been added as ‘shadow credit’ by the Indian Bank on May 14, 2025.”
The court said the bank failed to provide any clear evidence to prove that the customer had knowingly shared one-time passwords or payment credentials.
“The bank’s unilateral internal classification cannot replace legal safeguards specifically designed to protect victims of cyber fraud,” the court said.
The court noted that the lower court had earlier rejected Singh’s petition seeking release of the amount after relying on the police status report indicating that there was no information regarding any seizure or seizure amount on the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal.
“By rejecting the application based only on a narrow reading of the police report, the court allowed a miscarriage of justice against a vigilant citizen who had fallen victim to online fraud,” the court said.
The sessions court said that the lower court ignored the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidelines on unauthorized electronic banking transactions and ignored the bank’s statement showing shadow credit.
“This court is of the view that the impugned order of September 8, 2025 passed by the lower court suffers from illegality and merits intervention through exercise of the review power vested in this court,” it said.
The court observed that the petitioner acted with “utmost vigilance” by reporting the fraud immediately and was entitled to protection under the zero liability policy of the Reserve Bank of India.
The court ordered the bank to permanently release the withheld amount and asked the parties to appear before the court of first instance on May 30 to comply.
