ABHISHEK GUPTA vs STATE BANK OF INDIA

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 6th March, 2025 + W.P.(C) 1384/2025 & CM APPL. 6751/2025 ABHISHEK GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Miss Asiya Khan and Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocates versus STATE BANK OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajiv Kapur, Standing Counsel for SBI with Mr. Akshit Kapur, AoR and Ms. Riya Sood, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Present writ petition can be disposed of on a very short point. 2. The prime grievance of the petitioner is that after issuance of show- cause notice in question, respondent-bank had appointed a Forensic Auditor and the classification of their account as “fraud” is, primarily, based on the observations given by the Forensic Auditor. 3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that the classification is not based on such report. He, however, submits that admittedly, the Forensic Auditor was appointed after the issuance of show-cause notice and he also admits that such report was not supplied to the petitioner before the account was classified as fraud. In order to avoid any further delay in the matter, the bank has now produced the relevant portion of such report concerning the account of the petitioner. Such copy has now been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner and spare copy, which has been shown during the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 1384/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:07.03.2025 16:10:27 course of arguments, is retained on record. 4. Learned counsel for respondent submits that in view of the above, they would have no objection if petitioner is permitted to submit response, if any, to the aforesaid Forensic Audit Report within a period of three weeks from today and if any such response is received, they would take d